To think this is a bit dodgy (job application related)

[CrumpledCrumpet]

I applied for a job over the weekend (fairly senior, semi-specialist role). CV and covering letter. I didn’t think I would get the job, it was a bit of a punt, but I did meet all the criteria they had set out.

Deadline for applications was midnight on Sunday, my application went in about 11pm. By 9:30 on Monday morning I had a rejection email (after careful consideration, high volume of applicants etc…).

I don’t think I have ever been informed of the outcome of a job application less than 2-3 days after the closing date - how have they completed the sifting before many people have even poured their morning coffee? What’s going on here?

Someone who worked in HR/recruitment told me they have programmes set up that will filter out CVS that contain certain things/don’t contain others. I’m sure someone with better working knowledge will be along to explain better but she’s not the only person I’ve heard say that.

Often roles will have an auto reject set up for applications that don't include certain words, don't have x amount of years or x type of experience. But also as someone whose DH works in HR it could have just been someone working late or early!

I agree. Some kind of automated response based on something you'd written.

Yes, as lastqueenofscotland said electronic sifting can be used. It doesn't appreciate the time that applicants spend on their applications, which can be considerable depending on the job.

There's a couple of times I've been offered a job, having interviewed for it, before the closing date- so I assume people were still applying.

Ah just because you're email left your end at 11pm doesn't mean it reached their inbox by midnight. All sorts of delays etc happen, especially when inboxes are full...

@WheresMyCycle

Ah just because you're email left your end at 11pm doesn't mean it reached their inbox by midnight. All sorts of delays etc happen, especially when inboxes are full...

I really hope that you don't consider 10.5 hours a delayed response to a job application..

Might they just have had a cut off point, volume-wise, beyond which they didn't need to consider any more applications as they'd got enough for a shortlist?

Hope you have more luck next time.

I think WheresMyCycle meant that the job application itself may have been delayed, as in the company not receiving it in time to be considered.

They did receive the application because they've responded to it. But people do leave it until the very last minute often.

Yes the application was definitely received.

I was wondering whether they had made decisions before the deadline, but I can’t really understand why you would do this? In my experience as a hiring manager, the dross applications tend to come in first (people who are just firing off applications willy-nilly) and the best ones often come in closer to the deadline (people who are serious about the role and have been carefully crafting their application). For are fairly specialist role (not one where you just want a bum on a seat ASAP), what’s the benefit?

I don’t have experience of automatic software - but again, this isn’t something I’d tend to associate with a director level role. Maybe I’m naive? How sophisticated is it? Although I didn’t think I would get the job, I knew I ticked all the boxes they were looking for, so I can’t see how I could have been filtered out on something basic.

Either an automated application screening app sifted it out very quickly. Or, you ended up on the top of the pile on Monday morning because you were the last application received.

Remember, the first person to read your application doesn't want to give you the job. They want to reject as many applications as possible as quickly as possible.

TBH whenever I've been recruiting (for even quite senior roles) we've waited for 6-8 weeks to get the bloody thing signed off and live as a vacancy.

That means we're really extremely keen to find someone and interview as and when CVs come through that meet the criteria.

If one of those is a great fit I would offer, not wait until the closing date.

I don't think I've worked anywhere that waits until the closing date to look at applications and interview as by that time you may have missed out on good candidates.

Definitely all the roles I've had I've been offered before closing date.

And HR never remember to take down the vacancy when it's filled before closing date in any of the companies I've worked at.

I would anticipate for a senior level job that they may have employed recruitment consultants to find good candidates and therefore already gone through the process with them, particularly as those candidates will tend to have long notice periods. Or it's gone to an internal candidate and the external advert was just to tick a box.

I would yes/no/maybe applications as they came in, leaving maybe at most 10-15 to look at on the final morning.

No was for people missing basic criteria (e.g. failed to comply with application instructions, clear absence of any relevant experience etc). 75% of applications.

Maybe for people who had met the basic criteria for the application, in case anyone else on the sift thought they were interesting in an area I might have missed. 15% of applications.

Yes for those who offered a comprehensive application for the role. Maybe 10% of applications.

No would get an immediate rejection, as likely would the maybes, depending on how quickly others sifted for a transfer to the Yes pile.

Only the Yes pile got a serious sift, and most of them would be rejected if the first choices were all available for interview.

Also there's no law in the private sector that doesn't let them do what they damn well please, by the way.

So long as they aren't discrimination on any protected characteristic, they can run their application how they please. And "submitting your application at the last minute" isn't a protected characteristic.

If one of those is a great fit I would offer, not wait until the closing date.

That’s a bit of an eye-opener, we would absolutely not be allowed to do that where I work.

I’ve never been in a rush to get an application in long before the deadline (I often write a covering letter than go back and re-read it ‘cold’ a few days later), as I assume the deadline is the deadline.

In my experience as a hiring manager, the dross applications tend to come in first (people who are just firing off applications willy-nilly) and the best ones often come in closer to the deadline (people who are serious about the role and have been carefully crafting their application). For are fairly specialist role (not one where you just want a bum on a seat ASAP), what’s the benefit?

I would say it's the opposite way round. For a more senior or specialist role, you begin interviewing good candidates as soon as their CV lands. You don't wait until the closing date and go through all applications then. Its not just about getting a bum on the seat, it's snapping up the good applicants early as they are probably applying and interviewing elsewhere too. Applying at the last minute means they've probably already shortlisted and maybe interviewed a few too. They're looking for someone to do a job, so if they find a good one they're not going to wait around on the off-chance someone equally good applies. it's not a uni application or something

@CrumpledCrumpet

If one of those is a great fit I would offer, not wait until the closing date.

That’s a bit of an eye-opener, we would absolutely not be allowed to do that where I work.

I’ve never been in a rush to get an application in long before the deadline (I often write a covering letter than go back and re-read it ‘cold’ a few days later), as I assume the deadline is the deadline.

Why would it not be "allowed"? (Genuinely curious) is it public sector or something?

This is really useful - I’m middle management looking for a promotion and most of the roles I recruit for are a grade or two below my own, so sounds like different rules apply. We nearly always get dross applications early!

Why would it not be "allowed"? (Genuinely curious) is it public sector or something?

No we just have very specific policies around recruitment. One of which is we don’t shortlisted until after the deadline. But I can’t say I’ve ever done this anywhere else I have worked, we’ve always waited until the deadline before shortlisting.

Good candidates are hard to find at the moment and are in high demand. I am assuming if they started interviewing when the good CVs started coming.

I work and recruit in the public sector, we don't even get the semi-sifted applications to properly sift until the day after the deadline. However I will know in advance that is coming and usually have it in my diary for first thing before I get distracted and pulled into other things. I did a batch about 3 weeks ago and emailed HR by 9ish with my yes and no list and the scoring under each criteria for each applicant (you get very quick once you've done it multiple times, but this will still be a lengthier process than a lot of private sector companies who can respond quickly after a glance at applications), they will then send template reject emails to the no candidates, then set about contacting those for interview.

IME it was ATS if they rejected you that quickly. From my 80 applications I can tell you that most big companies don't use it but small to medium size actually do.

@CrumpledCrumpet

Why would it not be "allowed"? (Genuinely curious) is it public sector or something?

No we just have very specific policies around recruitment. One of which is we don’t shortlisted until after the deadline. But I can’t say I’ve ever done this anywhere else I have worked, we’ve always waited until the deadline before shortlisting.

Interesting. Well I suppose my experience is equally anecdotal so not sure which is the 'norm', but I've never worked anywhere that would have done that. Maybe for more junior roles it's worth letting the applications build a bit before doing some triage, but even then, it would be done at least every 2 weeks if the job was posted for a month and HR would have considered it abit of a waste to sit on CVs for a month and do nothing and then they're no longer available or interested etc.. seems very unproductive and counter intuitive to the aim of the exercise- to find a great candidate to fill a role that needs filling. Also my current role, I had my eye on this company for a while and as soon as I saw a great fit open up (had an alert set up on LinkedIn so knew about the advert as soon as it was posted), I applied and was interviewed and made an offer within 2 weeks...well before the "deadline". My company sees it as they found a great fit, no need to keep the process artificially open or continue searching, and if they want to hire me then make an offer