Have employers become less transparent with candidates during recruitment?

[EarthSight]

Just wanted to have a moan really about the lack of respect that employers treat potential candidates. I'm sharing some of my experience wondering if other people have experienced similar in the last year or so.

I've been to 3 interviews where something very important about the role wasn't disclosed until that stage. In one case it was very important terms of the contract (not pay), but similar. They awkwardly acknowledged that had been a change to the original job spec....but no one thought to tell me before I went all the way there to interview?? I think I wasted over 4 hrs on it in total - going through their lengthy application, then travel time plus interview, only for it to have been a piss-taking waste of time. I wasn't impressed and had a dim view of the fact they didn't even apologise. Just looked at each other and their feet in awkwardness as I exclaimed surprise that no one told me of the change, and that no, I won't be proceeding (up until that point I think they were likely to offer me the job).

Not wanting to repeat that experience, I applied for another role and made sure I also attended a pre-interview session where potential candidates get to meet one of the hiring managers for a short presentation and they're allowed to ask questions.

I went to the interview, and like the earlier one, it went really well....until they chose the end of the interview to tell me something extremely important about the location and training that they absolutely should have declared on the job advert, or in that pre-interview presentation at the very least.

In another interview, I wasn't 100% sure if they had an actual job lined up, or if they were just using the interview method as a way to get free consultancy about a niche subject.

Then last night, I saw a job that wasn't paid very well (a few thousand above minimum wage), that had 30 items in their essential requirements alone (with the desirable list it must be well over 40), of which you are expected to address every single one using the STAR method.

On it they expected 'first class' this, 'excellent' that......suffice to say I'm not going to apply because I think it's indicative of how unreasonably demanding the manager will be, for one thing😐

Yes every job seems to want someone who is qualified for a well paid professional job. But they’re paying £26,000 a year and expect 8.30-6pm and KPIs out the wazoo.

I don’t think it’s a new thing

I’m astonished at how some of these people are. Also, I have known someone personally who did that thing of going against the Company policy of core hours and she only told a candidate that she had different expectations after she had offered the job to them!

The candidate then asked for some kind of compromise and my friend actually said “ well you have to fit in with me for the first month so I’ve got oversight of you all the time” and then she was pissed off when the candidate decided not to take the job.

I don’t understand it.

I don’t know if it’s happening more than it used to, but it’s definitely happened in the past. I always ask as many questions as I can because I would be absolutely furious if I wasted time and came up against that.

But I know somebody very senior who had to do a lot of sneaking out to go to interviews who was in a similar situation and she said “ it’s fine, sometimes it’s not always possible to cover everything, or you change your mind during the interview process”.

what is this pre-interview session that you went to? I haven’t come across that.

It's awful but I don't think it's a new thing.

I used to work in an industry that relied heavily on short-term contracts. I applied for a role specifically because it was advertised as permanent. The interview invite said 6 months fixed-term, which I queried and was assured was a typo. I travelled several hours to the interview, where they confirmed it was a 6 month contract.

Yep lied to during nhs recruitment- told I could go full-time, that was the so called delay in offering me the job - then I couldn’t.

After starting found 4 people a month later got taken on full-time. How does this work exactly.

No one asked ever for a P45 (despite two out of hours calls demanding return of contract that no one asked for during induction but that’s ok) and just passing the 4th month emergency taxed at 20%.

Yes to answer your question. Lots of interviews and applications that feel I’m not quite getting the truth or the role isn’t as advertised when I get to speak to someone.

I also think with the ease in which you can now advertise online, the huge amount of available candidates for each role, the low likelihood that people will hold companies to account instead of walking away, that companies can treat people badly and get away with it.

So far this year, I’ve taken a role and resigned in week 1, verbally accepted a role on a teams call that no contract ever appeared for, and said no to a role when offered as that turned out to be different to what was agreed.

We really are having the piss taken out of us as employees.

Pre interview sessions are common in a lot of civil service adverts.

The civil service being the biggest scam I’ve ever come across.

The pre interview sessions I attended were mainly just the hiring teams revealing how often they move around jobs in the civil service. Nobody seemed to stay put long enough to work.

They were also attended by well over 100 people every time I joined one. Is there credit in the civil service for joining these calls?

@Thisisnottheone are these calls rather than people having to actually travel in?

@WaryCyanStork That's even worse than mine.

@Romancingthestone I share you indignation.

To answer an earlier question, yes the pre-interview session was in the public sector.

Yes, 100+ on a Teams call for 1 role for example. Easy to see by name/email who was public sector and who was external.

That’s hundreds of hours of public sector time as staff attend ‘job information’ calls in the work day for 1 role.

I agree with you OP. I applied for a job last year, had a pre interview phone call with their 'talent manager', then an in person interview followed by a site tour and a 'meet the team'. It wasn't until the interview that I discovered they'd left a vital component of the job out of their advert and JD (the requirement for regular national travel!) and I pointed out to them that it was discourteous to have left that out. I didn't get the job.

6 months later the job came back out, now including the travel element. So they did listen at least. The pay was also reduced aswell for some reason.

Interesting. A member of my team moved to a public sector job after being promised the earth at a pre interview meeting thing

She lasted a week before realising she had been wildly misled. She got in touch and we took her back the next day. Mainly because she was a great employee but also partly because I was so cross that she had been misled

That's not a new thing though.
When dh was applying for his first computer programmer job he commented that every firm wanted someone with qualifications plus 3 years experience at entry level wage.

No it's not new, but if you've ever applied for work in the third or public sector, you'll know what I was referencing. They often don't just want that 3 years of experience & qualifications, but someone who will address every single one of their other essential requirements, spanning everything from individual skills to personality attributes, often using the horrible STAR method. Sometimes, they haven't even left enough word count to be able to address all of their requirements.

I think you being a bit naive in thinking that everything will be in the job spec. Training is a temporary thing so won’t necessarily be listed as it’s not part of the ongoing job. If you’re moaning about wfh vs office days then again the employer can decide these

NHS Scotland - Summarise your 25 year career and answer all our job requirements.

Word count in each box - 300, 250, 250.

Who are these people kidding?

There was a thread a few weeks ago when someone was in trouble with her boss (civil service) when she pointed out she wasn’t busy and could take on more 😂😂

If you get any ackowledgement at all you are lucky these days.

Yes but your H was applying for entry level jobs. So of course it’s entry level wage. I’m talking higher level recruitment still offering a pittance.

Yes, less than half of my applications even sent me an email to say application received. Actual responses - 3.

Applications? 100+

Interviews - 0

Found interviews through contacts and reaching out to people - 5

LinkedIn, NHS & Civil Service Job Applications are click bait scams. This is a hill I will die on. Never again will I bother applying to an advert. Scams to make HR/Recruitment look busy.

I don't think many places have functioning HR departments any more. I remember a few years back loads being cut back and now AI is just scanning CV's for a lot of companies. I strongly suspect most women don't get through this first hurdle and AI clearly hasn't been programmed to do even a basic "thank you for applying" email, which says it all really.
The companies which use AI are all in the bin in my mind, they will reap what they sow with higher turnovers when the staff AI picks are all men lying out of their arses.

You've misunderstood my post. Of course I don't expect everything to be included, and I didn't mention anything about 'moaning' about work from home. This is about incredibly obvious, fundamentally important part of the contract conditions (other then pay) not being included as job spec stage, or being changed and then disclosed at interview.

Applied for a job, salary advertised as competitive. They emailed me to say they would like to invite me for an interview but the salary I had asked for on the application is outside of their budget and could I adjust my salary expectations? Emailed back asking what is the salary bracket. They emailed back advising they can’t disclose the numbers this early into the process! This was a project management type role for a fairly well known builder 🤷‍♀️

You’re too expensive. Please give us all your experience for a cheap rate.

Ummmmm, no thank you.

Haha 😄I've had the same experience in construction too with regards to salaries. One recruiter said they weren't allowed to disclose, but if I told them my salary expectations that they could tell me if that was within the banding 🙄What a ridiculous dance it all is, but that time I did disclose, and I was predictably told it was too high for their budget, so I just asked them to come back to me if they decide to increase it. I doubt they will, but the role is going to be difficult for them to fill with someone suitable, and not that many people have my experience and willingness to relocate.

When they pull those sorts of tricks, I just assume the salary is on the low end ans they know it'll put off candidates....but then, what do they expect a candidate to do? Do they really think someone is going to turn around and say that, yes, they're absolutely fine with accepting thousands of pounds less than what they originally expected? One role I saw expected a lot of travel across a large area in the U.K and their salary was at least 5k less than what I would have expected it to be. Months later, they were still looking for someone.

Ah yes, the fully remote / wfh option.

So long as by fully remote you work four days a week on site and 1 day from home with the option that we also get you in on that day for meetings as and when. That version of fully remote??

Or the one in which we tell you the days you can WFH and they move each week as the office only has 8 desks? That one?

Or the some weeks its fully remote, some weeks its fully on site so if you have any kind of caring responsibilities it’s impossible to plan them unless you are close to the office version?

I’m so bored of employers being arseholes when it comes to wfh/remote/on site and not being clear in their adverts.