How realistic (or not) is applying for 7-10 jobs per day?

[user1471867483]

I went for my first job seekers allowance appointment yesterday and the agreement you have to sign is applying for 7-10 jobs per day! Well, sometimes it takes me 3 hours to even apply for one job as the questions asked are rigorous. How can I possibly keep up this agreement? 😞

It will get her a job if she starts at the bottom, local chicken processing factory for example.

I’m not currently looking but any job in my field would take a minimum of 6 hours. It’s a long application with essentially a couple of essays thrown in. If it’s similar for you then just apply badly to 6 irrelevant jobs with a blanket CV and focus your attention on one relevant job.

Because firing off dozens of low quality applications isn't going to help you get a job. Recruitment isn't like a lucky dip - throw your name into the hat and maybe you'll get lucky and have your name selected for a job.

From the recruiter's side, they could be getting hundreds of applications for a vacancy, nearly all of which are poor quality applications. They're lucky if they have 10 people worth inviting to interview.

I wonder if the job centre staff have any experience of the inside of recruitment? I suspect not.

No qualifications
criminal record
medical issues
sensory issues

Some applications are worthy of 3 hrs
some 30 minutes

The first week 7-10 makes sense as you’d go through everything posted in the last few weeks that is still open.
But usually only 2-3 new job postings will appear each day to apply for. There literally aren’t 7-10 new jobs in any field being posts in a normal commuting area (unless it’s a big city) being posted every single day.

The agreements don’t account for the fact that jobs are thin on the ground.

People should be applying for any job they can do. Some applications obviously take a lot longer if done properly but the coaches know that so easily explained.

I’d add to this people should apply for any job they can realistically have a chance of getting. For example, many young people are being refused jobs working at Tesco’s because they are overqualified as uni graduate or because as Uni/college students they can’t commit to having the flexible work schedule the employer wants.

As someone who recruits, I hate this. Every vacancy that we have gets swamped with people sending in copy & paste applications that are totally irrelevant. Often, they make a mistake and don’t update the company name they’re applying too. It’s such a pain because they’re clearly only doing it so that they can say they’ve applied for X number of jobs but I still have to read and score their applications.

The choice isn’t binary between ‘apply properly for roles you can do’ or ‘send a million crap applications to jobs you don’t want’.

The OP could reasonable apply for 2 jobs a day that meet requirements and do a good job on the application, then justify why it was only 2 in the journal by providing details of how long it took, the role and any outcomes. If she saves the answers she produces and builds a set of templates then every application will take less time to produce while still being tailored and of good quality, so if she needs to submit many many applications then she will reach a point where maybe 7 in a day isn’t unrealistic and she can demonstrate that in the journal.

It’s easily done if you do a load of ‘filler’ type jobs, just applied for to fulfil the requirement. Upload cv onto Indeed and Total job websites, thousands of jobs on those allow one click application once you’ve uploaded the cv so only take seconds to apply for each of them. Then you can take your time to write decent applications for the jobs you really want. Often 1000s of people apply on the one click jobs so unless it’s very niche, numbers wise it’s unlikely you will be taken forward and need to interview etc.

OK, well I think it would be a better system if people have a reasonable grace period to apply for suitable jobs. Say OP is a trained doctor for example, should she be applying for dozens of jobs “in the chicken processing plant” or maybe… something that uses her skills and education?

Should she apply for a basic job 90min away which she will leave as soon as she gets something nearer/better, wasting the employer’s time and money in training her and leaving her colleagues to pick up her work whilst a replacement is found (from a pile of hundreds of low-effort AI generated applications)?

There is such a nasty race to the bottom attitude on here at the moment, makes me wonder if the site is full of bots.

It’s awful because it’s dehumanising.

of course endlessly applying for and being rejected from jobs is not the same as working in admin.

Job coaches don’t care what you write in the journal. If the agreement is 7-10 that’s what they need to see - no excuses.

The issue is that there often aren’t 7-10 new relevant, realistic job postings for most job searchers to apply to daily. The UK is slashing thousands of jobs every week. It’s all well and good these job coaches thinking 🤔 hm in 35hrs of work you have the time to do this many job applications, but it’s not being set against the reality of very few jobs that can be applied to which actually match the persons skill set, experience and qualifications.

The job centre would be better off looking at the whole person and sending them to qualification courses that would then make them qualified to do a basic job. Like even working as a cleaner you need hygiene certifications.

Depends on what sort of roles you’re applying for.

A sensible approach if you’ve previously been in non entry level roles might be 6 hours a day of those kind of more focussed applications and two hours a day of ‘any job is better than no job’ type applications. The latter will generally need less tailoring and have more reusable material.

Bash out 6 generic cover letter/CV applications every day to anywhere within 90 mins.
Spend the rest of the day working on one good application for a decent job.

People here are mistaking what the purpose of the job centre is.
It is not for getting you into work.
It is for getting you off benefits.

Famous quote from systems theory: "The purpose of a system is what it does."

The 6-7 applications is just another pointless hurdle, everyone knows it, but the idea is that you think "sod this" and drop your benefit claim, or you fail and they can stop your benefit.

It's an absolutely stupid system that only incentivises crap applications and wastes everyone's time. It in no way helps people who want to work find suitable work.

I'm recruiting for 2 roles at the moment, both require specific skills and qualifications and also adverts specify application via our website. I've received so many shite CVs on indeed. Not just half arsed, not tailored application but like genuinely irrelevant. Think zoo keeper applying to be a dentist, or vice versa. It's tedious. I actually wonder if the really irrelevant applications are because they are deliberately applying outside their sector so they don't piss anyone off who actually matters for their future!

So my advice would be, put time and effort into the jobs you want and then as others have said stick a generic CV on Indeed and spend half and hour a day pinging it off to get your numbers up. Don't even bother tailoring those filler ones.

If applying for jobs is dehumanising, what is living on benefits?

I'd argue neither are dehumanising just necessary, and resilience is a good life skill to take into the workplace.

Exactly what I aim to do.

Thank you all so much for your helpful replies 🙏

When i was unemployed for about 4 monthd in my 20's I did apply to that many, but non of the applications were especially good, mostly just copy and pasted form answers I'd used in previous applications or autofill on job search websites. Non of them got me anywhere, and I eventually got a job via a friend.

Since then I've either moved between jobs or from planned time out of work, with no real time pressure to find a job. These applications all took several hours, usually over a couple of days. However, I've got at least to interview every single time, so were arguably more effective.

I'd probably do a mix of both. Maybe pick one job each day that you especially want/ would be well suited for and put a few hours into that one, then do 6 quick copy/past ones to keep your numbers up.

I found it super stressful being on JSA! They were quite relaxed at the start, I was putting things like updating my CV, updating my LinkedIn etc.

When it came to job apps, I was finding some were closing before I even applied.

Also it took a while to get my experience written up into adjustable personal statements (especially if going for different roles or industries). And when you get an interview offer that has to take precedence in terms of prepping, again it took a while to have my interview question answers all written up on cards in STAR examples and practised.

So I probably was applying for 1-2 a week! But because they were very thorough and my job area is quite niche, I got an interview for every single one, so JSA were not too on my case.

I think if it went on for longer I'd have to have got quicker, or started doing a mix of a) applications for jobs I want b) applications for jobs I don't want but need to make up the numbers (spend less time on) - though I suspect this is part of the reason that the recruitment system is broken!

The more specific you are with them about what you are looking for the more they leave you alone though I think?

If you're out of work / returning / in between I really recommend Brave Starts, they have some good workshops that I found very helpful.

Thank you so much for your help guys. I'm quite overwhelmed actually and feel emoash 😢 as a result.

So are you improving your chances by working on the 1st one?