to hate employers who say this?

[MagicStarz]

I apply for a job, take a day of annual leave to attend an interview, buy new clothes for said interview, prepare for questions, pay for petrol to get there etc etc.

I then get an email a few days later saying they regret to tell me I have been unsuccessful, and they employed someone who has more experience.

They knew how much experience I had before the interview, as everything is listed on my application. I can't help but feel it's a waste of an interviewees time to invite them in for interviews, if you are going to go for someone with more experience.

I wouldn't mind so much if they said it was because someone else interviewed better, or they felt they'd be a better company fit. But saying it's because I don't have as much experience is a cop out, and shows they're just trying to fulfill a quota to say they interviewed x people for the role.

Especially since, call me a cynic, but I believe its extremely common that the real reason the company chose the candidate they did was down to race/sex/age/etc.

Im afraid I found this to be the case, ive been job hunting (now have a job!) But the interview process really did help me see what organisations were like compared to public sector (UK)

Interviewed for four organisations, and looking at the diversity in the open plan office, who was making the team drinks, and if any women were at board level (apart from HR) gave a good indication as to whether I thought I would fit.

Sometimes you genuinely see several candidates you'd be happy to employ and if you are in that happy position you then need to find a reason to differentiate. It's not a negative to the people who didn't get the job.

However. I recently left my job and we had two very good candidates to take over from me (and a third who probably would have been very good too). I didn't get the final say so my male boss took on the male candidate. Yes I think he got it because he was male and the office was largely female and boss didn't want to be too outnumbered. So I do think sex (less so race) can be a factor. That said, he's since replaced another member of staff too, with a female.

backseatonthebus panels definately help, but i was only interviewed by a maximum of 2 people at a time.

It’s easy to write experience on a cv an interview gives them the chance for them to question and you expand on that knowledge, perhaps that other person was better at explaining etc

What annoys me is often there's a preferred candidate, internal or known to them, but because they are a public organisation or charity they have to advertise and interview

I've seen this so many times in the NHS. Very very common. Even people jumping up bands etc. And talk of 'when such and such gets the job' like it's a given. The interviews are just going through the motions. The people have no chance. Better the devil you know seems to be the attitude and of course knowing someone who is already in the organisation and works well is the safest bet.

I am particularly sensitive to this due to having an unusual appearance. When I was job hunting I always got, "sorry, you haven't been successful because you weren't a good team fit." WTF does that mean? I've always asked for detailed feedback/results of competency based questions and got a lot of waffle and found I did well on the competency sections. They must have found someone who had a 100% score, eh?

Have also been to an interview where the interviewer was honest and said, "sorry to drag you here, but we had to interview externally but we know we want an internal candidate. Would like a coffee?" Erm, no. Considering I fought through traffic and paid £££to park in the city.

I had an interview recently, along with a case study to prepare that took ages. Was told after that I was, and I quote, a very impressive candidate who ticked all the boxes, but they didn't have any vacancies at that time. Why the fuck advertise a job and interview me then! Complete waste of time for all involved..

I saw a job advert the other day and it said something along the lines of 'we're looking for someone like ourselves, went to University (must be red brick)....'

They were clearly looking for a specific type of person. I could have carried out the role easily, as I am sure many other people could, as no degree was actually needed to carry out the role.

the worst 2 I have ever been told was on interviewing for a assistant manager position in a supermarket

1. we decided to give it to the guy who has been doing the role for the last 4 months. We just felt he had better ideas for the section.. (they had not asked mr anything about ideas to go forward)

2 It was between you and 1 other.. we gave it to the other guy. you didn't do anything wrong..

well then I can use that feedback to improve on how likeable I come accross

I find it more annoying when they say they have decided to offer the role internally instead. Uhh... what didn't you think of that in the first place??

I find it more annoying when they say they have decided to offer the role internally instead. Uhh... what didn't you think of that in the first place??

This sometimes happens because the employer doesn't appreciate the people already in the business. It takes an external recruitment exercise to highlight the talent in front of their eyes. The exercise is undertaken with the intention of recruiting externally, but the internal candidate wins through.

Bear in mind the internal candidate often isn't the preferred one. Everyone has history, and the internal candidate's history - and faults, and transgressions - will all be there. It's often not a done deal at all.

I wouldn't mind so much if they said it was because someone else interviewed better, or they felt they'd be a better company fit.

As someone up thread has already posted - it's a legal thing. The more experience line is a good let down without exposing yourself to a legal challenge from a disgruntled interviewee. Sorry you didn't get the job OP but unfortunately they can only give it to one person & the others are always going to be disappointed. In my experience as a recruiter, very rarely does anyone bring in other candidates to "make up the numbers", interviewing is long winded (& often quite tedious -sorry!)
Good luck in your job hunt.

I have never interviewed anyone to "make up the numbers". Ever. Total waste of everyone's time to do that. If we interview you it's because we've seen enough potential in your CV to see you in person among the hundreds of other identikit CVs.
Our recruitment team will send a generic rejection response just like the one OP received for unsuccessful candidates and we will keep looking if we don't find the right fit. It takes months to be trained up to do the roles in our team so we don't hire lightly.
I would also not respond well to someone asking for reimbursement of travel expenses after a rejection unless pre-agreed. (You know where the job is based when you apply for it!). It gives a really bad impression, especially when for all you know they may consider you for another role. We have frequently recommended a candidate to a different role in another team that they ended up getting and being more suitable for.

I have used the phrase when I wasn't allowed to say:

• your CV was full of errors and you're applying for a comms job
• you didn't answer the questions properly
• you clearly didn't know anything about the company or role
• you used the word girl repeatedly to talk about your female colleagues and seniors
• we weren't confident you had the right skills
• you said something in the interview which made us uncomfortable
• you were late and/or rude
• your expectations are too high for the role
• you didn't have enough experience compared to others
• you didn't explain your experience in the questions asked, just repeated rehearsed answers
• you only made eye contact/ addressed on interviewer
• you seemed way too nervous to the do (client facing) role
• despite the experience on your CV, you clearly didn't know what we were talking about, which suggests you've exaggerated.

It really is a catch all when we can't/won't say the real reason!

"I have used the phrase when I wasn't allowed to say:

• your CV was full of errors and you're applying for a comms job"

Why did you invite the person to interview if you were unhappy with the quality of the CV?

"It’s easy to write experience on a cv an interview gives them the chance for them to question and you expand on that knowledge, perhaps that other person was better at explaining etc"

Yes, but if so the explanation that OP didn't have enough experience wouldn't be accurate. It would be that the other candidate performed better at interview.

Yes. Happened to me a few times. But now in a lovely job and I guess you just need to keep on going, and think maybe there is a reason you got turned down.

@Gwenhwyfar “perhaps that person was better at explaining” = performing better at interview 👏🏼

I've done a lot of interviewing. Sometimes people explain what they've actually done in a role and it's simple, other times they've done a lot more than the basic CV description. It isn't just about performing well at interview, but what the candidates have actually done in the past. If the role is a primary school teacher then there's going to be a lot of similarity in what each experienced candidate has done, but that isn't the case for say a project manager role.