To think employers want applicants to bend over backwards

[jobhunter25]

During the recruitment process? I'm currently searching for a new job and can't believe how many hoops some companies expect people to jump through, for shitty pay/benefits might I add. I left my last role around a month ago (unhappy for years, toxic environment) and luckily I had some savings I was able to live off but I'm now ready to get back into work. I've applied for around 15-20 jobs and I've realised that employers don't just invite candidates in for an interview if they like their C.V anymore. It's so long winded. For example, a role that I applied for (pay is between 18-22k btw) wanted me to take a 45 minute test, and if I passed they would call me for a pre-screen chat and if they thought I was suitable they'd invite me in for an interview. I actually emailed them back this morning saying I'd been offered another job as I really couldn't be arsed with the hassle, not for 22k anyway. I understand companies being more thorough with a high paying role though. AIBU?

Or they employ you for your skill set and refuse to let you use it because they are the manager, you are the employee so you can't possibly know more about a subject than tem.

@jobhunter25

If the employer is a large company such as a supermarket, they can receive hundreds of applications for that one role alone. You have to have a way of whittling that number down with the least manpower as possible. Online tests are an easy way to do this.

I was in recruitment for years and the amount of people who apply for jobs who have little or none of the experience and skills in the job description can be quite a number. You also get people who apply who do not want the job but apply to fill their quota of applications. Also people do lie on their applications and say they can do something when they cannot, a numerical test for example is a good way of proving they have the skills you need.

So the way to weed out the people who don't really want the job is to get the people who do to do the sorting for you, by completing laborious tests?

I didn't say that

I think this is one of the (very few) areas where academia is actually not too bad. Most researcher/lecturer jobs i have applied for have just required a CV and covering letter. And only if you're invited to the interview stage is there usually a half or full day of assessment consisting of 1-2 presentations and an interview.

The online aptitude tests are pointless and irrelevant anyway.

When my BiL was looking for supermarket work he applied for 4 pretty much identical shelf stacking positions with 4 different supermarkets.

Of the 4 aptitude tests 2 he failed and 2 he passed.

Well, different supermarkets have different criteria as to the type of worker they want, so it's obvious that some will pass one but fail another.

The ones we ran were not. They were set for the type of person we were looking for. It is annoying when you fail a test, and I have as an applicant, but it means you are not the right fit.

Each company will be looking for slightly different things so the tests will be slanted differently, hence some you pass, some you fail.

Yes I agree. I have niche skills. I recently applied for a job. They called me up and offered it to me, but they added something at the last minute. I was caught off guard. I realised that they did it on purpose, because no-one would have applied if they knew. It was to travel to London whenever needed, and how lucky I live in the west midlands, its so close!. Actually no, it's not near London, it would take me hours to get there, and the train tickets are so expensive. It annoys me, when they don't tell you what's expected, until the end.

I'm intrigued to know how the criteria for a shelf stacking job can vary so much between different supermarkets.
What type of different qualities and skill sets are required depending on whether you're stacking shelves at asda or stacking shelves at tesco?

Attitude, helpfulness, thinking on their feet etc - different supermarkets want their staff to act in different ways to how other supermarkets do.

In some supermarkets, staff are encouraged to walk their customers to the particular shelf if they ask where something is, at other supermarkets, the staff are encouraged not to do that, and just give directions instead. That's one example. Others are such as what they want staff to do in other scenarios, such as a spillage, breakage, customer accident, etc. Or what they expect their shelf stacking staff to do in other more relevant scenarios, such as if there's no space on the shelf, what they'd do with the stock they couldn't put on the designated shelf space of if they see a shoplifter. Or importance of checking best before dates and rotating stock, putting items "face front" on the shelves, etc - again, different supermarkets have different ways of operation. Checking "shelf edge" prices and weight against the stock they're putting out, etc.

Also with the increase in use of computers, hand held tablets, scanners, etc., different supermarkets may have different systems in use and want shelf stackers who are more computer literate to work the devices quickly and accurately.

Lots of variables really between different employers. And there's a lot more to "shelf stacking" than simply putting stuff on shelves!

I work in a supermarket. Husband works in another one. Both have issues with recruitment/retaining staff. Pretty much everyone who actually works in them is of the opinion that we should hold open interview days and basically offer jobs to people who can read write and don't smell. Then get them started because the actual job weeds people out anyway regardless of the interview process.

For example. I work in home delivery. The reality of starting work at 4 or 5 am is very hard. It's also a more physical job than most people expect and you need speed and accuracy. Tbh most people can't hack it but those that can are often the ones who would struggle with the online testing etc.

Husband works nights. They used to interview at night for the role. Now they interview during the day. Interviewing at night gives a small taste of what it's like to do 'normal' things at 2am.

Still. Management know best

So to get a supermarket job I need training in every process of that supermarket, otherwise I won't be able to pass the test. Or else I pass the test but on the basis my random answers were a lucky fit for that job. Yeah, that sounds logical and scientific.

People mention shelf stacking a lot, but I have never seen a job ad for shelf stackers - do such jobs actually exist? I mean most of the supermarket jobs I've seen seem to require you to do a lot of different tasks including shelf stacking but certainly not limited to it.

The jobs are advertised as customer assistance roles but they tend to be for specific departments when people interview. So checkouts cafe home delivery have particular requirements. Less usual for pure shelf stackers to be employed but my husband has just been offered a role sorting out the frozen section in a supermarket. He wouldn't be multi skilling as they would want him concentrating on one department.

I think it's a bit cheeky of employers to say they include tonnes of time-consuming tests to filter out "timewasters". Has it occurred to them that good applicants are going to be filtering them out for the exact same reason?

It also sends a message to me that if they think I should spend many days working for free for them (not just normal CV and application writing but e.g. prepping for and recording interviews, phone calls, pre-interview task, writing a plan, turning up for multiple assessments over days) they are also likely to make free with my time if I go to work there.

For the record I think job-relevant tests as part of the interview process (e.g. turn up 45 minutes early and do a sample of something you'd have to do for the job) is absolutely fine and in fact a really good idea.

All of this, absolutely!

@HouseofHolbein I agree that open days for these kind of roles would be much more beneficial. Employers are missing out on lots of workers who could potentially be perfect for the roles but they might not necessarily want to jump through the myriad of hoops required just to get the opportunity to get an interview. I think this is something the government needs to address if they are actually serious about getting people back into the workforce.

Funny thing is that at the start of covid, our local Tesco's manager was on Facebook saying they were desperate for staff and asking people just to turn up with their paperwork (passport, P45, etc) and they may be able to start working immediately, and he meant immediately. Other supermarkets would doing similar.

A few of my clients whose businesses had to close (B&Bs and non food shops) got jobs in local supermarkets like that. Some never re-opened their businesses and remain working in supermarkets (similar money for similar hours!).

@GoldenCupidon

For the record I think job-relevant tests as part of the interview process (e.g. turn up 45 minutes early and do a sample of something you'd have to do for the job) is absolutely fine and in fact a really good idea.

That's exactly what I did. We'd select for interviews based on CV and hand written covering letter and then they'd do our test either before or after the interview, which would take maybe 20-30 minutes, and was entirely job-relevant - you can't get more relevant than looking for mistakes in a simple set of accounts or tax return for someone claiming to have experience in accounts or tax return preparation! We found it highly useful. We didn't have a fixed pass/fail mark, in fact we didn't even formally "mark" it, we just looked at the errors they picked out and the errors they missed, which gave us a "feeling" as to their level of ability/experience/literacy/numeracy, etc.

This is why broadly I only go for roles viana recruiter, I can ask questions about the process and anything missing from the job description up front and if I don't like the answer, I don't apply and haven't wasted my time. I also won't ever apply for a role without knowing the salary up front, learned that lesson the hard way by trying not to laugh at a verbal offer.

Of course, some recruiters are crap but I now know 2/3 good ones who I can contact if I start looking again or who will occasionally ask my thoughts on something interesting that comes their way.

I got my Morrisons job at the start of Covid when I just pitched up at an open interview because they were looking for staff. They were starting a home delivery section on a temporary basis so I started there. 3 years on I'm still there.

Yet another rejection after 3 interviews, a project that took a couple of days to do, and a trip into London to present it. So about 3 days down and a £50 train ticket.

Apparently my project and application was very strong and they really liked me. But there is another candidate with more experience... I have 10 years experience they were asking for 2 years.

We need to apply this to the childcare sector.

We are expected to be fully qualified, fully trained in safeguarding, first aid, food hygiene etc and refresh these every few years, endless courses and training on SEN and other things, observations, planning, physical and emotional care, 10 hour days, and on and on and on.

It's an abomination that we are paid minimum wage.

In a nutshell, employers/bosses need to get real and realise they don't hold the power they once did, and from some responses on this thread I can see some are still a LONG way off from this realisation!