Do I HAVE to do an interview for job I'm already doing?

[shouldertocryon]

First entry this, but need advice.

I'm currently job share 2.5 days per week and the same position come up alongside me but full time. After much deliberation myself and hub agreed that kiddies now both juniors and we could do with the money (fuel bills!) so on Monday I expressed interest to my bosses. My boss thrilled, but when he spoke to HR they said I have to apply along with everyone else (no-one else interested is already doing this job) via application form and interview. My boss said don't worry as he's interviewing and he will make sure I get it as there is no competition and (obviously) I can do it stood on my head.

I just think it's such a nuisance and why, when I was interviewed for the same role (identical pay - pro rata- and job decription) 5 years ago, would I have to be interviewed again? What would they be assessing me on, my ability to do more hours?

I've emailed HR to have a good whinge but the advert for the job still went out as planned today so I guess they haven't taken notice.

Anyway, despite the support from my boss, I feel like I don't want to go for it on principle. I mean what if someone else DID get it - it would make me feel useless and I don't think I could stay even in my current position.

Any advice or support would be really welcome.

Thanks

Since it's a new position, you can't say that the work follows the job and on this basis, you should have an automatic right to it.

For instance, if they were restructuring, then you would be entitled to follow the job as long as it was, I think, 60% of the work.

I would look at it from the viewpoint that you should fly through the interview as you've been doing the job.

Don't cut your nose off despite your face.

Having an open, transparent and rigorous recruitment procedure can seem like a pain in the neck if both you and the person interviewing know you will be great.

But it's important for lots of reasons, particularly to avoid claims of discrimination or unfair treatment/favouritism of any kind.

Couple of other points. Just because you have been doing and identical job for 5 years doesn't actually make you necessarily the best person for it. Someone better might come along. I'm sure that's not the case and obviously your boss is equally sure, but it isn't impossible.

If there is a robust recruitment procedure you should be able to rely on the fact that the best person for the job will get it, by and large. It seems clear that will probably be you, but isn't it better to get the job after a transparent procedure than to just get the nod from your boss and run the risk of others thinking there was favouritism or something?

For the sake of sitting through one very easy interview with your boss who thinks very highly of you, you are prepared to give up this opportunity to make a point? That seems very shortsighted to me and not especially fair on your boss who wants you for this post and is willing to go through a minimal procedure to ensure that it's all by the book and above board, and faces the prospect of you refusing to apply in a huff.

Sorry if that sounds harsh but it seems a lot of fuss to make over what will essentially be a bit of a chat and a box to be ticked, assuming you are the best person and your boss thinks you are, which is what you are saying.

This is absolutely normal proceduire everywhere nowadays.. A new and full time post came up which just so happens to be your line of work and it was dvertised. May the best candidate get the job. Given you are already doing the job and your boss is very pleased with you and is conducting the interview, you don´t have anything to worry about.

This situation is all to common and infuriating for outside candidates, who take the time to put in their application and spend time and money on getting to interview in complete ignorance that an insider is earmarked for it anyway. I suspect you don´t know how lucky you are and should apply graciously! Good luck!

It is Equal Opps protocols. I went through similar to change from temp to permanent. It was advertised internally but I was hte only applicant and still had to have an interview !

Thanks everyone - it's in perspective now. You make me realise how trivial I'm being. Plus I read my first entry back and I sound REALLY big headed. Hope you believe this isn't the case, which is why I'm really in fear of this interview.

It was nice to hear that this procedure is the norm, whereas everyone else I've told has just responded "WHAAAAAT? THEY CAN'T DO THAT!!!"

Glad I downloaded the Application Form before I came home "just in case"; I'll get it started tonight, and with a bit of enthusisam as well. Looks like we'll be able to have a bit of central heating on this winter after all!!

Thank again

If it's any consolation, I have secured a training place which is highly competitive, and then about a week before the course, I was asked to reinterview, but this time in front of a 4 person panel .

Someone apparently complained that the process wasn't fair.

So, off I trotted.

And I got through.

So will you...

Thanks ilovemydog, I feel better, and well done you for showing 4 interviewers what you are made of!

my dd2 was working as a temp and they decided to make the post permanent after she had been there 6 months so it was advertised and she had to apply and was very nervous but she got it

I have had to apply for my own job 3 times so far! (all different roles) I think this is something that happens very frequently in the public sector.
They know you'd be good at it, 'second' you to do it for 6 or 12 months, then because of legal hoops, make you apply when they actually confirm and make the job permanent.