Didn’t get job

[tiredsotired6]

I’ve been working as a temp for one company for over a year. They’ve been very happy with my work, giving me a lot of good feedback. A few people (including the manager) have said they would really like me to be on permanent staff as I do a great job.

Anyway, a few months ago a perm role came up, which was essentially my role to the letter. Having had the good feedback I decided to apply as felt I had a very good chance.

As I’m sure you’ve already guessed, I didn’t get the job. I’m now feeling like my confidence has been shot and my manager was just leading me on.

The new person has now started and seems fine but no better than me at the job. Worse still, I’ve been asked to help them out if they have any questions about how to do the job that I’ve been doing for over a year.

The result is that a job I used to look forward to every day has now left me feeling deflated and upset. I now dread work and generally just feel my confidence has been shattered.

AIBU and WWYD?

There is no long term investment or commitment either side

On the commitment point: that is not true of me. I can say without doubt I have worked bloody hard and have given it 100%.

That’s kind of expected?

just to confirm I’m not throwing any shade at your own dedication. But the point remains- you don’t need development, investment in serious training, qualifications etc when you’re a temp.
You can also leave whenever you like and many temps do the work specifically for this advantage. It’s just the way it is

Yes doing the job to the required standard is expected, and what a temp is paid for.

Of course. But the poster said there’s no long-term commitment on either side. Personally I think giving 100% and doing the job to the best of my ability over the course of a year does show a long-term commitment.

Edited to add: the poster is clearly right though about the “either side” bit - as the company has shown zero interest in a long-term commitment to me!

Or being marked down for not using enough of their buzz words.

Worse still, I’ve been asked to help them out if they have any questions about how to do the job that I’ve been doing for over a year.

So the person who didn’t get the job has to train the person who did? 😵‍💫
I think you would be within your rights to tell them to get stuffed (or the professional equivalent thereof)

Thing is some interviews are for careers and progressing on that career path and other vacancies are just jobs. Cafes requesting you are passionate about food and drink is absurd.

I was a very highly thought of temp, being personally requested when companies needed a temp and they had used me before. Temping is also a great way to quickly adapt to new environments and industries at short notice. You have to learn the job quickly if you don’t want to be replaced by another temp. I would love to go back to temping but there isn’t the demand anymore, at least not if you don’t live near a big bustling city. Being a high quality temp is a skill.

Get applying for other things. Never give a company your loyalty. It’s never, ever returned.

I have learnt this through this process. It’s so sad as I love the company, gave it my all and wanted to continue doing so. Never again.

This is a ludicrous approach to recruitment. What a shame that none of you used an ounce of common sense and kept setting that poor woman up to fail.

This, really. The clue is in this sentence:

“I had a temp staff member who was really good at the job”

What more do you need?

I agree. I genuinely wonder how some people become managers. In your shoes I would take all the learning and apply elsewhere OP. And I certainly would not make training the new hire my responsibility-you’re not their manager.

Thankfully it has not been the case for you OP but to the other poster: making a solid temp staff member apply for jobs over and over again knowing they fall down at the last hurdle simply due to interview nerves is cruel and humiliating.

The person who is offered the position needs to be successful at interview. Internal candidates generally have the "team fit" advantage so the job is likely theirs to lose. If they don't do enough the panel cannot offer them the role. It's less about performance as you can look past an internal candidate's nerves but you need to hear relevant content.
I couldn't tell you the number of interview panels I was on in my last role but it was often the case interviewees just missed the point of the question, often even with prompts they had an agenda in their head.
Practice with a friend can help people to learn how to listen to questions and how to answer from an 'I did, I know' perspective (rather than we).

It is always disappointing when you don’t get the job you were hoping for, They probably did a better interview than you, but that’s not to say they would be better than you at the job. . I would ask for some feedback to see how you did in the interview and you can use it going forward for any other roles that come up.

I hate it when this happens

The employers forget we are a human being who wants and needs the job to live off and have been doing the role very successfully until it’s passed on to someone else who we then have to train. What a waste of time having to train a newbie to do the exact same role you’re already doing.

it’s insulting as well as leaving us out of a job an actual job to pay the bills and survive

Just give the new person the minimum information required to do their role and when they ask for help again just say you’ve already shown them and that’s that. They need to figure it out from the information you’ve given them.

You need to be cold and distant even if it’s not in your nature.

Yes this.

inform the new hire who they need to speak to for information, so Jean in Finance or Steve in HR and so on, but don’t teach/train them on the core job, they should know that.

If the company’s line is it’s their interview process and the new hire came out on top, no reflection on you, nothing personal ( and so on ), then surely part of their process is to ensure the new hire is technically competent in their role?

“Interview scores”. 🙄

It all seems so detached from reality. And even if recruiting is seen to be about interview scores, I think the problem is that interview questions and techniques have become very artificial. My pet hates were always: why are you passionate about this role, where do you see yourself in x years time, what makes you special etc? For clarity, I was successful in all but one of my job applications so I’m not bitter!😀 Just cynical and old.

How many of us on here would score well in an interview about say, parenting? We might not say the right things or use the right buzz words, or - horrors - not come over as passionate enough.

This has happened to me. it was what a previous poster said that I was doing the day to day job with the clients as a volunteer, but the interview was about KPIs and I didn’t get it.i had interviewed for the same job elsewhere that were really focused on the clients and a manager dealing with KPI.
it felt awful

If the organization allows direct internal recruitment than yes promote internally. However if they recruit externally they should chose the best person at interview. If OP interviews best for a job at a different company will it be fair she loses out to an internal candidate because the interviewer has seen the internal candidate doing the job?

Many years ago, in my first management job, I was on an interview panel to appoint someone in my team. A chap was being interviewed who'd been bouncing around on short term contracts for years across different depts. He seemed good, but never got his contract converted to a permanent one (as they were more able to do then), as had happened with others.

Anyway, had the interviews, we appointed him to a permanent contract and he was great. I found out later that a big boss said afterwards that I'd "let the 'N word' get the job". (Sorry to repeat this, I know it's hideous).

So my feeling is that while it's really unfortunate that sometimes good people may not do well in the interview process, at least there's a chance to brush up on your skills and learn to sell yourself. Where there isn't a transparent recruitment process it means that people can be excluded on the basis of things they can't change. Sadly, we can't always trust the people who hold the power to do the right thing.

But interviewing isn’t a natural on the spot conversation- you have to prepare and rehearse

plus if you’re brilliant at the job and know want you’ll be asked you’re at a massive advantage - why all the angst? Try being a candidate who doesn’t have a clue!

its obvious you don’t agree with fair modern interview techniques but they are just what happens now. Playing the game gets you what you want. When did people become so resistant to following process? If you encourage people to rant and rave and stamp their feet they will struggle to get employment which we all need.

So much more! A lot of people can be good at a job - doesn’t make them the perfect fit for that role in that company. Temps are used to do a job until the perfect candidate to fill the position permanently can be found.

For example, a lot of excellent temp staff only thrive when they are not in the same job for too long. They are temps because they lack the ‘stickability’ to hold down a permanent job.

Someone can be good in a role, but lack any ability to adapt if the role needs to change or be tweaked (perhaps due to changing internal or market conditions).

Someone can be good in a role but lack ambition and in a company with a culture that likes to nurture and grow, may not be a fit if training and role progression (for longevity of service) is desired.

There are LOADS of other examples I could give.

💯 this and I think this is what’s not being appreciated in this thread

for the vast majority of jobs, MANY people can do them well. It’s not exclusive or talent based.
By the time you’re interviewing, everyone you interview should be able to do the job well. they will need training in the sense of being shown the companies systems, policies and getting to know who does what, of course- that’s what probation is for.

but being good at the job is basic. You don’t give someone a job because they are good at it.