Job I applied for has been re-advertised

QueenieMe · 2023-07-03T20:31:11+00:00

I've posted this on the 'waiting for news' thread but thought I'd post separately too. I've just been emailed by a recruiter to say their first advert didn't generate enough responses for a shortlist, so they're going to re-advertise, and if I want to apply again I can. Umm... 😳 Am I BU to feel a bit insulted???? If I was a good candidate, wouldn't my application be carried over regardless? Right now I definitely don't feel like applying again.

LuckOfTheDrawer · 03/07/2023 21:33

Oh no, that would feel like a bit of a blow.

Can the recruiter ask them if it's worth your while re-applying? Maybe they need 3x interviewable applicants or something like that.

mynameiscalypso · 03/07/2023 21:38

We had to do this at work recently. From memory (I was at arms length from the process), the original job description we drafted was a bit shit and therefore we got a lot of unsuitable applicants applying (and a couple of good ones). We therefore re-wrote the job description and put it out again. We had to get the couple of candidates we liked to reapply so that it would be fair. One of them ended up getting the job. It seemed to be a hurdle invented by HR but was not really a reflection on the candidate other than we wanted to make sure we had a big enough pool to benchmark them against.

Original poster

QueenieMe · 03/07/2023 21:38

LuckOfTheDrawer · 03/07/2023 21:33

Oh no, that would feel like a bit of a blow.

Can the recruiter ask them if it's worth your while re-applying? Maybe they need 3x interviewable applicants or something like that.

It's an internal recruiter. They said my application can be included again if I'm still interested, but the tone was lacklustre and it's the fact they're not automatically rolling over current applications that makes me think why bother.

OP posts:

Original poster

QueenieMe · 03/07/2023 21:39

mynameiscalypso · 03/07/2023 21:38

We had to do this at work recently. From memory (I was at arms length from the process), the original job description we drafted was a bit shit and therefore we got a lot of unsuitable applicants applying (and a couple of good ones). We therefore re-wrote the job description and put it out again. We had to get the couple of candidates we liked to reapply so that it would be fair. One of them ended up getting the job. It seemed to be a hurdle invented by HR but was not really a reflection on the candidate other than we wanted to make sure we had a big enough pool to benchmark them against.

It sounds like you really wanted them to reapply and made that clear. That's not the vibe I got from the email I've been sent!

OP posts:

mynameiscalypso · 03/07/2023 21:41

I doubt our HR is competent enough to pass on that message with any level of enthusiasm - it was purely a process step for them. You have nothing to lose by applying though.

Original poster

QueenieMe · 03/07/2023 21:43

mynameiscalypso · 03/07/2023 21:41

I doubt our HR is competent enough to pass on that message with any level of enthusiasm - it was purely a process step for them. You have nothing to lose by applying though.

😂

I do have something to lose though – more of my confidence. I'm finding job hunting really draining this time round (I'm an older candidate and ageism is an issue). I don't want to apply again and be rejected twice by the same place!

OP posts:

Spinewars23 · 03/07/2023 21:59

A cleaning facilities ‘help desk’ really wasted my time last year,

May 2022 interviewed me never hearing back from them verytimely, until rejection landed early June 2022 for their said 19.5k Job at time

went on to be rejected jumping through their hoops answering emails after interview.

they then got a toot on hottest day of 22 as I was started a new job (still only wanted to pay one 19.5k at time) they couldn’t understand why no one would genuinely be interested…

Bromptotoo · 03/07/2023 22:00

I can't quite get why, say two, applicants was a problem unless perhaps there was an issue 'upstream' about descriptions etc.

But if the recruiter needs x suitable/potentially appointable applicants for a shortlist and they've only got x/2 then there's an issue.

My employer reserves the right to do it the other way; if they've enough folks to run with applications might close before the published date.

Original poster

QueenieMe · 03/07/2023 22:10

Bromptotoo · 03/07/2023 22:00

I can't quite get why, say two, applicants was a problem unless perhaps there was an issue 'upstream' about descriptions etc.

But if the recruiter needs x suitable/potentially appointable applicants for a shortlist and they've only got x/2 then there's an issue.

My employer reserves the right to do it the other way; if they've enough folks to run with applications might close before the published date.

This ad said they reversed the right to close early too.

I've just seen it's gone live again and the closing date is now in one week's time. I'm not sure why they think they're suddenly going to be inundated with applications in that short amount of time if they weren't the first time. Plus I might not be the only original applicant to think why bother applying again, so they could end up with less people than they had!

OP posts:

Original poster

QueenieMe · 03/07/2023 22:15

Reserved not reversed!

OP posts:

YesLittleElephant · 04/07/2023 07:59

I've been on both sides of this as a recruiter and a candidate.

I was recruiting for a job recently where we had to readvertise several times. Although we had one or two people from the first advert who we could shortlist, we just did not have enough applicants for which we could benchmark. We wanted someone with a very specific skill-set, and we just weren't getting what we wanted in terms of applicants, so it took a few tries before we got it. The person who got the job in the end was a lady in her late 50s and she was head and shoulders above all the other applicants.

I wouldn't hold much sway with the lack of enthusiasm of your HR recruiter. They will have to be neutral. It may well be that there's an internal requirement for them to readvertise as other posters have said. Particularly if it's a public sector employer. You could think about whether it is worth having a chat with the hiring manager, otherwise I think I'd just give my application a once over and send it back in.

I was once interviewed for a job I really wanted. I didn't get it, but I got really good feedback and was told I was second choice. The other candidate was offered the job as they had demonstrated more experience in something they wanted in their business at interview. About a month or so later, the same job was readvertised. As I had got such good feedback I thought I got back in touch and said I'd really love to be considered again, and redid my application emphasising my experience in the area they said the other candidate had shown. I didn't get an interview. That felt really humiliating, but as they say fortune favours the brave.

Sendmymillioninaninvoice · 04/07/2023 08:07

Not necessarily. The manager will invariably have said they want ten people in for interview. The recruiter’s job is to pleasse the client. These days info is scanned so they might also have requirememts eg- ms office/sage/aat/ quickbooks/zendesk/ etc. If your cv doesn’t have some of these you might automatically not get selected.

A really good tip is to make sure your skills are highlighted- eg having had management experience I was surprised that leadership wasn’t automatically on my CV. Ditto MS Office, organisational skills etc. spell it out because you might be getting rejected from jobs for this reason. Also, don’t take it personally.

EarringsandLipstick · 04/07/2023 08:12

You're being a bit petulant. Of course they couldn't just 'carry over' your application.

It's a separate recruitment process. Their reasons are valid & you need to reapply if you are interested, and don't take it personally. Equally don't worry about HR, they have no particular interest in the role & therefore may sound lacklustre

Original poster

QueenieMe · 04/07/2023 08:14

YesLittleElephant · 04/07/2023 07:59

I've been on both sides of this as a recruiter and a candidate.

I was recruiting for a job recently where we had to readvertise several times. Although we had one or two people from the first advert who we could shortlist, we just did not have enough applicants for which we could benchmark. We wanted someone with a very specific skill-set, and we just weren't getting what we wanted in terms of applicants, so it took a few tries before we got it. The person who got the job in the end was a lady in her late 50s and she was head and shoulders above all the other applicants.

I wouldn't hold much sway with the lack of enthusiasm of your HR recruiter. They will have to be neutral. It may well be that there's an internal requirement for them to readvertise as other posters have said. Particularly if it's a public sector employer. You could think about whether it is worth having a chat with the hiring manager, otherwise I think I'd just give my application a once over and send it back in.

I was once interviewed for a job I really wanted. I didn't get it, but I got really good feedback and was told I was second choice. The other candidate was offered the job as they had demonstrated more experience in something they wanted in their business at interview. About a month or so later, the same job was readvertised. As I had got such good feedback I thought I got back in touch and said I'd really love to be considered again, and redid my application emphasising my experience in the area they said the other candidate had shown. I didn't get an interview. That felt really humiliating, but as they say fortune favours the brave.

Ouch! Being told you are second choice and then not getting an interview when it's re-advertised is really harsh!

This is all good advice, thanks. I need to have a think. It's not a dream job scenario, so I suspect, having slept on it, that I'm more aggrieved because of that - that feeling of being rejected for a job you're not desperate for, but would like to do, is almost worse than being rejected for one you'd love!

OP posts:

Original poster

QueenieMe · 04/07/2023 08:17

Sendmymillioninaninvoice · 04/07/2023 08:07

Not necessarily. The manager will invariably have said they want ten people in for interview. The recruiter’s job is to pleasse the client. These days info is scanned so they might also have requirememts eg- ms office/sage/aat/ quickbooks/zendesk/ etc. If your cv doesn’t have some of these you might automatically not get selected.

A really good tip is to make sure your skills are highlighted- eg having had management experience I was surprised that leadership wasn’t automatically on my CV. Ditto MS Office, organisational skills etc. spell it out because you might be getting rejected from jobs for this reason. Also, don’t take it personally.

Thanks for this. I did all of the above – I spend a lot of time refining my CV for each individual application, because I know how they scan CVs now.

But you're right, I shouldn't take it personally. The thing is, I've been rejected for jobs I really, really wanted and didn't feel half as aggrieved as I do about this, for a job I'd quite like! I think it was the dismissive tone that got my back up but I appreciate what others have said that they need to keep it neutral.

OP posts:

JaukiVexnoydi · 04/07/2023 08:17

The person who is lacklustre in contacting you isn't the person who would actually be your manager if you got the job are they? I would work on the assumption that the issue is that the person responsible for communicating with you is a bit shit at their job. Is that person going to be someone you would work with closely if you got the job? (Ie are you applying for a job in HR) if not then don't let it affect you.

Being benchmarked against suitable competition is an important part of the recruitment process. And demonstrating resilience and confidence through a recruitment process is important too. Being the sort of person who wouldn't reapply under these circumstances would certainly mark you out as unsuitable for some job roles.

Do you have all the old details for job advert and further details as published previously and can you do a close comparison between that documentation and the new details? It's really important to identify if anything has changed. If there are any changes then the issue is that they didn't realise until they got the pile of applications that there's an important aspect of the job or capability they need that they weren't seeing enough evidence of in the applicant pool.

If that happened then it's really important that you revise your application to demonstrate that you have that attribute.

Readvertising is expensive. It doesn't happen on a whim. If the company are taking this recruitment process this seriously it could be a really good indicator that the role is going to be valued highly once you are in it. That's worth investing time and effort into engaging with.

Newgirls · 04/07/2023 08:20

Apply! Get to an interview and find out what’s going on. Honestly if it’s anything like my company it will be lack of coordination rather than personal.

Original poster

QueenieMe · 04/07/2023 08:27

JaukiVexnoydi · 04/07/2023 08:17

The person who is lacklustre in contacting you isn't the person who would actually be your manager if you got the job are they? I would work on the assumption that the issue is that the person responsible for communicating with you is a bit shit at their job. Is that person going to be someone you would work with closely if you got the job? (Ie are you applying for a job in HR) if not then don't let it affect you.

Being benchmarked against suitable competition is an important part of the recruitment process. And demonstrating resilience and confidence through a recruitment process is important too. Being the sort of person who wouldn't reapply under these circumstances would certainly mark you out as unsuitable for some job roles.

Do you have all the old details for job advert and further details as published previously and can you do a close comparison between that documentation and the new details? It's really important to identify if anything has changed. If there are any changes then the issue is that they didn't realise until they got the pile of applications that there's an important aspect of the job or capability they need that they weren't seeing enough evidence of in the applicant pool.

If that happened then it's really important that you revise your application to demonstrate that you have that attribute.

Readvertising is expensive. It doesn't happen on a whim. If the company are taking this recruitment process this seriously it could be a really good indicator that the role is going to be valued highly once you are in it. That's worth investing time and effort into engaging with.

Thank you for the considered reply. I do take on board what you're saying, but I don't think I'd be demonstrating a lack of resilience if I didn't reapply - rather I'm concentrating my efforts on other jobs I've applied for where this isn't happening and I have interviews pending. I have compared the job adverts and there are no changes.

I do wonder what they think is going to change in the extra week they've given themselves though, in terms of attracting a bigger pool of candidates. It's a niche public sector role, so I can't seem them suddenly being inundated!

OP posts:

LadyLapsang · 04/07/2023 16:17

Surely you have a copy of your original application. Just use the week to review / refine. It may be a different sifting and interview panel. What have you got to lose?

Ree1234 · 08/01/2024 18:44

I have had a similar experience. I applied, the vacancy closed, and I didn't get through the sift. I emailed the contact for feedback politely. They said I lacked one qualification, which was not indicated in the job description. I went back to the now closed job advert and they had changed it, even though it was closed and at a higher wage.

The learning point from this is after applying take a screenshot of the job advert and date it for your records. Just incase they change the goal posts

PeeblesPobble · 08/01/2024 19:11

EarringsandLipstick · 04/07/2023 08:12

You're being a bit petulant. Of course they couldn't just 'carry over' your application.

It's a separate recruitment process. Their reasons are valid & you need to reapply if you are interested, and don't take it personally. Equally don't worry about HR, they have no particular interest in the role & therefore may sound lacklustre

Not true, if the advert/person spec etc hasn't changed as OP states they can definitely carry it over. Had this happen to me.

PuppyPerson · 08/01/2024 19:17

Job hunting is bloody hard work.
And often (in my experience this year) replies from HR people and recruiters can sound flippant and insensitive. That isn't a reflection on you.
My advise is to try and not take it personally. I know that's hard, I found it hard.
I think in this circumstance, if it is a case of resubmitting your previous application to an unchanged job and, it's worth a go.
As you say you have other live applications and interviews lined up. Keep going! Best of luck!