Tough targets for jobseekers

JOB seekers are set to face new hurdles before signing on for benefits in a bid to increase their employability prospects.

New changes to the rules for job seekers come into force at the end of the month, and will require people to put together a CV and email address before visiting the Jobcentre.

There will also be more regular progress meetings to check on job hunters as they will now meet their advisor on a weekly basis.

The announcement comes as the Government feels the economy is improving with 31,000 more people in employment in the south west in the three months to January of this year.

From 2011 to 2013 in Swindon, 580 young people started work experience placements, 200 went into sector-based work academy courses, and 70 new business start-ups were created.

North Swindon MP Justin Tomlinson said the move aimed to help more people get into employment.

“We have made it our number one priority to get people back into work,” he said. “We have introduced a new package of measures which will ensure job seekers must prepare a CV and set up an email account before meeting with the job centre.

“They will meet weekly rather than fortnightly, and there will be regular reviews of their progress. “In return we will give people increased support to move into work but leave no space for excuses not to take up that offer.”

Mr Tomlinson said the new rules would ensure people were working for their benefits.

“We are determined to end the something-for-nothing culture and build an economy that delivers for people who work hard and play by the rules,” he said. “This is providing appropriate support to equip them with the best opportunities to succeed in job interviews.

“We have seen a 30 per cent reduction in job seekers since we came into office. “That is a sign of strength in Swindon’s local economy as we continue to attract new businesses.”

Employment organisations in Swindon urged caution with the new measures to ensure access to benefits does not become restricted to those who are in urgent need.

They said some jobseekers would need that initial help to create their CV.

David Wreathall, of Inner Flame, who helps get 16 to 25-year-olds into work, said: “For a while now, we’ve seen Jobcentre challenging them more about what they are doing to get a job, and being prepared to stop their claim if they don’t deliver.

“We understand that they will be expected to attend a CV workshop, and we trust that this will not delay them being able to claim benefits in the meantime. These young people need to be challenged and supported in equal measure.”

Esther McVey, the Cabinet Minister For Employment, said: “With the economy growing, unemployment falling and record numbers of people in work now is the time to start expecting more of people if they want to claim benefits.

“This is about treating people like adults and setting out clearly what is expected of them.”

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:31am Wed 9 Apr 14

nigelej says...

My son was made redundant went around the agency's signed up for most of them within 2 days he had work .only paying £6.31 per hour ,he progressed from that to £8 per hour . Then through hard work while temping he as been taken on permanantly on £18 per hour . You have to be prepared to start some where . Normally I will always defend those that can't work and are being victimised . But those that can should be made to . And if there's jobs there then they should be filled . Lets be honest if there are vacancies in the job center why are people signing on there's no need there's a vacancy so fill it .
My son was made redundant went around the agency's signed up for most of them within 2 days he had work .only paying £6.31 per hour ,he progressed from that to £8 per hour . Then through hard work while temping he as been taken on permanantly on £18 per hour . You have to be prepared to start some where . Normally I will always defend those that can't work and are being victimised . But those that can should be made to . And if there's jobs there then they should be filled . Lets be honest if there are vacancies in the job center why are people signing on there's no need there's a vacancy so fill it . nigelej
  • Score: 0

10:32am Wed 9 Apr 14

nigelej says...

My son was made redundant went around the agency's signed up for most of them within 2 days he had work .only paying £6.31 per hour ,he progressed from that to £8 per hour . Then through hard work while temping he as been taken on permanantly on £18 per hour . You have to be prepared to start some where . Normally I will always defend those that can't work and are being victimised . But those that can should be made to . And if there's jobs there then they should be filled . Lets be honest if there are vacancies in the job center why are people signing on there's no need there's a vacancy so fill it .
My son was made redundant went around the agency's signed up for most of them within 2 days he had work .only paying £6.31 per hour ,he progressed from that to £8 per hour . Then through hard work while temping he as been taken on permanantly on £18 per hour . You have to be prepared to start some where . Normally I will always defend those that can't work and are being victimised . But those that can should be made to . And if there's jobs there then they should be filled . Lets be honest if there are vacancies in the job center why are people signing on there's no need there's a vacancy so fill it . nigelej
  • Score: -1

11:17am Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 4

12:55pm Wed 9 Apr 14

nigelej says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future . nigelej
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Wed 9 Apr 14

house on the hill says...

madreeves wrote:
So, providing a CV (which everyone should do anyway when applying for a job), providing an email address (big deal) and turning up once a week for an interview are the "tough" new measures? Sorry, but under no circumstances can that be called "tough". We have turned into a nannied state haven't we.
I do always find it strange that immigrant workers give up everything, travel thousands of miles to find work, improve their lives and provide for their families and yet the unemployed in Swindon think its tough to go to the job centre once a week. Says it all really!
[quote][p][bold]madreeves[/bold] wrote: So, providing a CV (which everyone should do anyway when applying for a job), providing an email address (big deal) and turning up once a week for an interview are the "tough" new measures? Sorry, but under no circumstances can that be called "tough". We have turned into a nannied state haven't we.[/p][/quote]I do always find it strange that immigrant workers give up everything, travel thousands of miles to find work, improve their lives and provide for their families and yet the unemployed in Swindon think its tough to go to the job centre once a week. Says it all really! house on the hill
  • Score: 3

1:45pm Wed 9 Apr 14

mrstidds says...

I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!!

Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy?
I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!! Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy? mrstidds
  • Score: 2

2:19pm Wed 9 Apr 14

mrwoo says...

mrstidds wrote:
I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!!

Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy?
Perhaps if you weren't so up yourself "I am a highly qualified PA/secretary" and tailored your CV to the job you were applying for, you would have not been living off the state for 6 months? "I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda" no doubt below you, this probably came across in your application. I wonder how the NHS copes without you?
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"
[quote][p][bold]mrstidds[/bold] wrote: I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!! Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy?[/p][/quote]Perhaps if you weren't so up yourself "I am a highly qualified PA/secretary" and tailored your CV to the job you were applying for, you would have not been living off the state for 6 months? "I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda" no doubt below you, this probably came across in your application. I wonder how the NHS copes without you? Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing" mrwoo
  • Score: -6

2:28pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
Thanks I now work for myself and all going well.
After my time on benefits I worked in an office and to hear the opinions of people who have never been in the same position sickened me.

You are right things like benefit st only serve to cause deeper divisions and when we see stories about Maria Miller ripping off the system it is only going to get worse. Both sides see that they are the victims and this mentality will not change. Siggghhh.
[quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]Thanks I now work for myself and all going well. After my time on benefits I worked in an office and to hear the opinions of people who have never been in the same position sickened me. You are right things like benefit st only serve to cause deeper divisions and when we see stories about Maria Miller ripping off the system it is only going to get worse. Both sides see that they are the victims and this mentality will not change. Siggghhh. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

2:32pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Hmmmf says...

mrwoo wrote:
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"

Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time.
Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.
[quote][p][bold]mrwoo[/bold] wrote: Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"[/quote] Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time. Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides. Hmmmf
  • Score: 7

2:41pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

mrstidds wrote:
I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!!

Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy?
I can tell you are racist.
Wow not sure where to start on this.

Did you become this bitter after only 6 months?
I did have a similar experience where the job center seemed determined to send me to a car dealership (it has since closed) the interviews I went for were job I tailored my CV to go for.

As you were so highly qualified did you feel jobs on offer were below you?
As for the issue of immigrants I have always found them to be hard working honest people. I have project managed and number of projects around the world and needed new skills when I returned to Swindon.

Do you feel let down by the NHS?
[quote][p][bold]mrstidds[/bold] wrote: I spent 6 months unemployed after being made redundant from the NHS in June last year. I jumped through all the hoops the Job Centre said I had to jump through, including going on a course that did absolutely nothing to improve my job prospects. It was told I had to attend as I was over 55 and had been unemployed for more than 26 weeks, so fitted their criteria. The fact that it was a course to teach me how to use a computer, apply for a job, write a CV and covering letter when I knew all this already (I am a highly qualified PA/secretary) was beside the point. If I didn't attend I didn't get my benefit paid. To my mind, it was a tick box exercise. The only reason I spent so long unemployed was because there were no jobs out there for me! I applied for admin jobs and was told I was over qualified. I even tried for a 15 hour a week check out job at Asda and didn't even get an interview, probably because again I was over qualified. I found the staff at my local Job Centre to be rather condescending in their attitude towards me at times - you can do this job, you must apply for it - despite the fact it didn't pay enough for me to live on and I could top up with other benefits, but when I asked what I was entitled to, as a single person with no dependants, I was told I didn't qualify for anything else! How writing a CV and having an email address is going to solve the unemployment problem is beyond me. Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing it might help rather than penalising those of us who want to work but can't because there are no jobs available for us!! Rant over. Can you tell I'm not happy?[/p][/quote]I can tell you are racist. Wow not sure where to start on this. Did you become this bitter after only 6 months? I did have a similar experience where the job center seemed determined to send me to a car dealership (it has since closed) the interviews I went for were job I tailored my CV to go for. As you were so highly qualified did you feel jobs on offer were below you? As for the issue of immigrants I have always found them to be hard working honest people. I have project managed and number of projects around the world and needed new skills when I returned to Swindon. Do you feel let down by the NHS? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -8

2:46pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Hmmmf wrote:
mrwoo wrote:
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"

Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time.
Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.
Its not the word its the context you used it in.
Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use.
Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.
[quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrwoo[/bold] wrote: Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"[/quote] Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time. Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.[/p][/quote]Its not the word its the context you used it in. Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use. Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -7

5:54pm Wed 9 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
[quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 3

6:12pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -4

6:35pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Who actually cares about the thumbs?
Matron he is out again.
Who actually cares about the thumbs? Matron he is out again. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -2

7:19pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Hmmmf says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Hmmmf wrote:
mrwoo wrote:
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"

Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time.
Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.
Its not the word its the context you used it in.
Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use.
Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.
It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrwoo[/bold] wrote: Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"[/quote] Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time. Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.[/p][/quote]Its not the word its the context you used it in. Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use. Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.[/p][/quote]It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again. Hmmmf
  • Score: 3

8:18pm Wed 9 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on.

It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process.

As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?[/p][/quote]What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on. It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process. As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 3

10:15pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Hmmmf wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Hmmmf wrote:
mrwoo wrote:
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"

Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time.
Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.
Its not the word its the context you used it in.
Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use.
Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.
It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again.
Follow the reply threads it is not a one to one thread but a group discussion so comments are made to all using the comments box.

As you will notice above a comment it will say "quote" people use this when they want to reference something in that comment to expand on their own point.
I would of thought at 55 you would understand this,,,then again it does seem your thought process is YOU.
I do enjoy the limited thought process of many on here you must be left or right......now that you have had a look through do you understand? No probably not as you know your own mind.....Take your own advice and read the information in front of you rather than getting all angry and feeling rushed to get your laughable comments in.

Would you like me to walk you through how threads from multiple posts work?...you are a funny little man. I bet you are popular on here.
[quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrwoo[/bold] wrote: Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"[/quote] Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time. Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.[/p][/quote]Its not the word its the context you used it in. Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use. Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.[/p][/quote]It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again.[/p][/quote]Follow the reply threads it is not a one to one thread but a group discussion so comments are made to all using the comments box. As you will notice above a comment it will say "quote" people use this when they want to reference something in that comment to expand on their own point. I would of thought at 55 you would understand this,,,then again it does seem your thought process is YOU. I do enjoy the limited thought process of many on here you must be left or right......now that you have had a look through do you understand? No probably not as you know your own mind.....Take your own advice and read the information in front of you rather than getting all angry and feeling rushed to get your laughable comments in. Would you like me to walk you through how threads from multiple posts work?...you are a funny little man. I bet you are popular on here. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

10:20pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on.

It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process.

As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.
I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else.

Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business.

What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual.

PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?[/p][/quote]What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on. It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process. As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.[/p][/quote]I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else. Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business. What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual. PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -2

10:24pm Wed 9 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Hmmmf wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Hmmmf wrote:
mrwoo wrote:
Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"

Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time.
Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.
Its not the word its the context you used it in.
Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use.
Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.
It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again.
Oh I cant be bothered to walk you through your own stupidity....I think you are a moron but that name is already taken on here,FOOL,,,,yes I think that suits you best.
[quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hmmmf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mrwoo[/bold] wrote: Oh and a racist as well! "Maybe if we stopped all these immigrants coming in and claiming benefits for doing nothing"[/quote] Sorry mrwoo, but calling people 'racist' simply for using the word 'immigrant' died with the Blair/Brown nulabour government. And a good job too. Pity the rest of the UN's Agenda 21 didn't go out of the window at the same time. Anyone over 50 unemployed and looking for work is in for a rough ride, all offical support is geared towards getting 16-24 year-old NEETs off their backsides.[/p][/quote]Its not the word its the context you used it in. Phrases like us and them, I almost have more respect for someone who is overtly racist at least they dont hide behind the passive aggressive language you use. Go learn new skills get off your backside and go find the world will not be handed to you.[/p][/quote]It wasn't me who used it except in the context of pointing out mrwoo's (and now your own) nulab kneejerks. You're not really very good at the whole reading and comprehension thing, are you? Go learn some critical reading skills and employ them before embarrassing yourself like that again.[/p][/quote]Oh I cant be bothered to walk you through your own stupidity....I think you are a moron but that name is already taken on here,FOOL,,,,yes I think that suits you best. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

12:24pm Thu 10 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on.

It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process.

As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.
I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else.

Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business.

What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual.

PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.
That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff.

Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's "

Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior?

The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on.

By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer.

The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?[/p][/quote]What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on. It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process. As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.[/p][/quote]I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else. Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business. What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual. PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.[/p][/quote]That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff. Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's " Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior? The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on. By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer. The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 1

12:54pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on.

It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process.

As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.
I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else.

Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business.

What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual.

PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.
That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff.

Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's "

Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior?

The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on.

By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer.

The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable.
Now I didnt say any of the points you have listed, jumping to conclusions and putting words into mouths, you must be a great employer. Your sentences are also a little hard to follow not sure what you point is are you only looking to recruit people with a low level of skill or intelligence? It would depend on the type of work maybe a robot would better suit your needs?

You quoted Nigel but it wasnt in response to his comment though was it?
It was in response to mrstidds maybe its your eyes playing tricks on you....that can happen with age.

Yes it is a considerable amount of work to do but surely worth the effort (maybe you feel you have done enough at your age) I can understand why you may be looking forward to retirement.

It is up to the employer to ensure they provide a good working environment . We have already said that any employee worth having should always be looking to improve if you are only looking to keep things as they are that is your decision.

Now I hope that has cleared up which comments were relevant and how the "quote" box is used to reference what "people" have said rather than an individual to address an individual you would use the @ button to indicate who you are talking to.
You also replied to a different comment rather than the one addressed to you but I didnt use the @ so that may of been my error.
Would you like some help with navigating threads?
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?[/p][/quote]What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on. It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process. As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.[/p][/quote]I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else. Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business. What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual. PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.[/p][/quote]That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff. Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's " Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior? The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on. By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer. The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable.[/p][/quote]Now I didnt say any of the points you have listed, jumping to conclusions and putting words into mouths, you must be a great employer. Your sentences are also a little hard to follow not sure what you point is are you only looking to recruit people with a low level of skill or intelligence? It would depend on the type of work maybe a robot would better suit your needs? You quoted Nigel but it wasnt in response to his comment though was it? It was in response to mrstidds maybe its your eyes playing tricks on you....that can happen with age. Yes it is a considerable amount of work to do but surely worth the effort (maybe you feel you have done enough at your age) I can understand why you may be looking forward to retirement. It is up to the employer to ensure they provide a good working environment . We have already said that any employee worth having should always be looking to improve if you are only looking to keep things as they are that is your decision. Now I hope that has cleared up which comments were relevant and how the "quote" box is used to reference what "people" have said rather than an individual to address an individual you would use the @ button to indicate who you are talking to. You also replied to a different comment rather than the one addressed to you but I didnt use the @ so that may of been my error. Would you like some help with navigating threads? Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -2

4:07pm Thu 10 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel.

I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context.

For the record the thread goes:
* Badgersgetabadname
* Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem)
* Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony)
* Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread)
* Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment)

Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion.

I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.
I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel. I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context. For the record the thread goes: * Badgersgetabadname * Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem) * Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony) * Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread) * LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread) * Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment) Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion. I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 0

4:11pm Thu 10 Apr 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel.

I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context.

For the record the thread goes:
* Badgersgetabadname
* Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem)
* Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony)
* Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread)
* Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment)

Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion.

I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.
Yup, me too. The only possible exception to that rule would be where someone has initiated a career change and is very qualified in one area but not in the area they have applied for a job in. Care needs to be taken by the employer in this regard that it is really a career change they are after and not just a job, any job.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel. I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context. For the record the thread goes: * Badgersgetabadname * Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem) * Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony) * Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread) * LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread) * Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment) Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion. I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.[/p][/quote]Yup, me too. The only possible exception to that rule would be where someone has initiated a career change and is very qualified in one area but not in the area they have applied for a job in. Care needs to be taken by the employer in this regard that it is really a career change they are after and not just a job, any job. The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 1

4:12pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
nigelej wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard?
I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv?

My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please.....
The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others.

@Nigelej
Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.
I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .
The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.
What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business?
Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee.

Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force.

Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on.
Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?
What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on.

It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process.

As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.
I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else.

Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business.

What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual.

PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.
That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff.

Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's "

Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior?

The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on.

By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer.

The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable.
@Hmmmf
you have gone quiet have you had a chance to read through and now understand your angry little head made you look very stupid.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nigelej[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: These tough new measures????? was this not always as standard? I am all for a helping caring society but how can anyone look for a job without a cv? My own dealings with the job center was that I was to sign here and next please..... The general attitude of you are on benefits you are scum was awful the circumstance of how you got there is irrelevant to most people and all they really want is to be able to point a finger or look down on others. @Nigelej Job center on line has been caught out many times showing jobs that do not exist. They are not all vacant positions. Again from personal experience I applied for 6 positions that I was told I was over qualified for and was then told the positions had been filled only to see the jobs still on the site two years later. Fair play to your son though not enough of that about.[/p][/quote]I do know what you say is true about false jobs .The same things happen in agency's they will advice jobs to get people in to register I know that from experience I used to work in them . I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's .believe me you are not scum and should not be made to feel that way .Altough I know the way people are towards people on benefits is awful and the silly programmes that we see on tv does not represent the true life on benefits at all . I do hope you have got yourself sorted now and if not do so very soon good luck for the future .[/p][/quote]The reason employers won't take on someone who is over qualified is because they do not think they will hang around and are simply waiting for something better. Given the costs of finding someone in the first place are quite high, no employers wants to go through it again for the same role in a short space of time.[/p][/quote]What about creating a working environment where taking on qualified people would develop and grow the business? Surely all people are looking for something better if an employer is insecure about their business the problem is not with the prospective employee. Yes looking for a new employee using agencies it will cost you a fortune alternatively they could think for themselves and be pro active and look for suitable staff themselves. A better work place with prospects will have better staff retention leading to a stronger work force. Many on line companies charge very reasonable rates you can use your companies web site the list goes on. Is this too simple,,,is an employment agency just an easy costly option?[/p][/quote]What a load of baloney. I think you need to come in the real world and see what goes on. It also costs a lot more than agency fees to go through the recruitment process. As for everyone looking for something better, whilst true, for an employer it is better to get a fit for the role that is required and grow talent to additional roles than take a chance that some one who is over qualified will stay around on a lower salary than they can command because their qualifications are greater than the required role.[/p][/quote]I appreciate there are other issues involved, time for interviews away from the business etc....but that is more about your organisation than anything else. Another person who doesnt read previous comments and just goes off on first thought,,,maybe thats why you have trouble in business. What you mean to say is for an employer it is easier to find someone who fits your role rather than taking the time to develop the individual. PS nice use of the term baloney I havent heard that since top cat.[/p][/quote]That's right you didn't read the thread. My original comment was aimed in response to someone asking why business wouldn't employ overqualified staff. Here's Nigel's original comment. " I'm also perplexed that these people take the decision that you are over qualified .that is your decision if you want to take a step down not there's " Do you really think that senior managers who get made redundant are going to be offered junior management positions in an organisation offering 50% of the salary (because its a junior role)? You really think that senior person isn't going to be looking for a better role from the moment they start? Do you think an employer should pay senior manager rates when they only need a junior? The same applies to almost any position. If someone is vastly overqualified, it is very unlikely an employer will take them on. By the way I have no trouble in business. If I need to recruit I recruit for what I need and employ based on whether I think they are there for a duration rather than looking for next better offer. The issues around recruitment are more than just time for interviews etc. There is the whole onboarding and training aspect to consider too. The impact on other staff, the paperwork, the list is considerable.[/p][/quote]@Hmmmf you have gone quiet have you had a chance to read through and now understand your angry little head made you look very stupid. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

4:31pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel.

I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context.

For the record the thread goes:
* Badgersgetabadname
* Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem)
* Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony)
* Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread)
* Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment)

Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion.

I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.
You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced.
I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel. I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context. For the record the thread goes: * Badgersgetabadname * Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem) * Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony) * Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread) * LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread) * Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment) Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion. I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.[/p][/quote]You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced. I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

4:32pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel.

I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context.

For the record the thread goes:
* Badgersgetabadname
* Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem)
* Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony)
* Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread)
* Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment)

Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion.

I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.
You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced.
I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances.
and comments from mrstidds use the quotes to reference points.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel. I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context. For the record the thread goes: * Badgersgetabadname * Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem) * Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony) * Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread) * LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread) * Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment) Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion. I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.[/p][/quote]You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced. I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances.[/p][/quote]and comments from mrstidds use the quotes to reference points. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

4:42pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

If I may fleetingly return to the topic.
Why is a CV only deemed an essential requirement now? who and what were the job center sending out into the work force?

What type of vacancy are you looking to fill with a person that doesnt think a CV is important.
If I may fleetingly return to the topic. Why is a CV only deemed an essential requirement now? who and what were the job center sending out into the work force? What type of vacancy are you looking to fill with a person that doesnt think a CV is important. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

7:37pm Thu 10 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel.

I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context.

For the record the thread goes:
* Badgersgetabadname
* Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem)
* Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony)
* Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread)
* LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread)
* Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment)

Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion.

I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.
You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced.
I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances.
and comments from mrstidds use the quotes to reference points.
I don't think you understand how to read a response thread. There is no reference to the people you made in the thread to which I was responding and the thread is clearly quoted throughout.

I'm sorry you have difficulty understanding this. You clearly have a bee in your bonnet about something, but it isn't all clear what it is. Mr Woo and Mr Stidds are clearly having their own response thread.

And for the record I certainly haven't worked in limited circumstances. I have quite a wide and varied career.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: I think you will find my original comment quoted Nigel and mrstidds isn't even in the thread. My original comment most clearly was in response to a point raised by Nigel. I suggest it is clearly you who has eyes playing tricks on them I think you are getting comments from different people mixed up and out of context. For the record the thread goes: * Badgersgetabadname * Nigelej (the one where doesn't get why over qualification is a problem) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one where I explain why it could be a problem) * Badgersgetabadname (where you talk about creative working employment) * LordAshOfTheBrake (the one mentioning balony) * Badgersgetabadname (the one where you say I don't read the thread) * LordAshOfTheBrake (rebuttal of reading the thread) * Badgersgetabadname (Your last comment) Not sure why you think I am approaching retirement, I have many many years to go and am happily and gainfully employed and do have to get involved with recruitment on occasion. I agree its up to an employer to provide a good environment, however the point being discussed is why people who are over qualified can get turned down for a role. I know of no one who would deliberately employ someone significantly over qualified for a role on much less money than they could command for a role of more appropriate seniority. They could not take the chance that within weeks/months that person would be off for a better more suitable opportunity. You may not like it, but that is the way things are. I have seen it happen on several occasions.[/p][/quote]You left out comments from Hmmmf and mrwoo which was the thread that was referenced. I am sorry to hear you have worked in such limited circumstances.[/p][/quote]and comments from mrstidds use the quotes to reference points.[/p][/quote]I don't think you understand how to read a response thread. There is no reference to the people you made in the thread to which I was responding and the thread is clearly quoted throughout. I'm sorry you have difficulty understanding this. You clearly have a bee in your bonnet about something, but it isn't all clear what it is. Mr Woo and Mr Stidds are clearly having their own response thread. And for the record I certainly haven't worked in limited circumstances. I have quite a wide and varied career. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 0

8:02pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

No sweetie no problem at all.
For what record? what are you talking about? Did you mean in response to my comment?
It is a discussion based on the story above it is not that big of a story that you cannot use other peoples comments,,,,pretty sure I explained that to you in an earlier comment.
This is now the third time I have tried to discuss the topic and you have failed...
Are you saying you can only concentrate on your own comments? from your comments I can understand that,,,my grandparents are much the same and you need to break things down for them. Thats probably why I thought you were older.
Bless you for your content though. If you have no wish to comment on topic further please refrain from personal insults you only confirm earlier questions as to your intelligence.
No sweetie no problem at all. For what record? what are you talking about? Did you mean in response to my comment? It is a discussion based on the story above it is not that big of a story that you cannot use other peoples comments,,,,pretty sure I explained that to you in an earlier comment. This is now the third time I have tried to discuss the topic and you have failed... Are you saying you can only concentrate on your own comments? from your comments I can understand that,,,my grandparents are much the same and you need to break things down for them. Thats probably why I thought you were older. Bless you for your content though. If you have no wish to comment on topic further please refrain from personal insults you only confirm earlier questions as to your intelligence. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree