Can you defer your place if you get accepted?

2wsxcde3

Just wondering if someone passes stage 4 and/or stage 5 of the garda recruitment process, can they defer their place? Like for a year or two?

I think someone on here says the medical is only good for 6 months. Don't know how true that is. This may or may not limit how long you can defer a place. I don't know.

Does anyone know if you can defer your place in Templemore if you get through the recruitment process?

Richyroberts

When I signed up it was possible but only in certain circumstances like continuation of studies or family dependency!but a word of caution I know people who deferred it and then when things got tight with recruitment they lost out!!my advice would be unless it's urgent get started straight away

JoeyJoe93

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Just wondering if someone passes stage 4 and/or stage 5 of the garda recruitment process, can they defer their place? Like for a year or two?

I think someone on here says the medical is only good for 6 months. Don't know how true that is. This may or may not limit how long you can defer a place. I don't know.

Does anyone know if you can defer your place in Templemore if you get through the recruitment process?

I hope you mentioned this to your interview board so it can be their decision to take you over an applicant who is raring to go.

If you plan on waiting two years you can always apply to the new campaign.
As stands, failed, dedicated applicants would be rightly upset to have been
beaten by someone who isn't taking the job.

2wsxcde3

JoeyJoe93 wrote: »

As stands, failed, dedicated applicants would be rightly upset to have been beaten by someone who isn't taking the job.

If a person fails the interview, they fail on their own merit. Not because someone else "beat" them to it.

Do you think PAS should be putting through failed applicants as potential gardai?

JoeyJoe93

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

If a person fails the interview, they fail on their own merit. Not because someone else "beat" them to it.

Do you think PAS should be putting through failed applicants as potential gardai?

No but you beat plenty of stage 3s when we were judged against each others scores.
One of those people could have sailed the interview.

So there's just that to consider.
Makes no difference to me but I'm sure there's plenty of people who would be put off.

ollieo

JoeyJoe93 wrote: »

No but you beat plenty of stage 3s when we were judged against each others scores.
One of those people could have sailed the interview.

So there's just that to consider.
Makes no difference to me but I'm sure there's plenty of people who would be put off.

All bands' scores should be compared to set standards

How can someone in Band 2/3 who scores high compared to others in Bands 2/3 but less than someone in Band 1 who failed Stage 3 be put forward for interview?

It will be the same for the interview, every candidate has to reach the required standard regardless of what band you are in.

Otherwise it defeats the purpose of the process if people who scored higher earlier on but missed out due to being compared to other high scoring candidates only for candidates in lower bands with lower scores moving forward to the next stage because the scores in their band were lower overall.

It should not happen and I believe set standards are in place to ensure fairness of the recruitment campaign.

JoeyJoe93

ollieo wrote: »

All bands' scores should be compared to set standards

How can someone in Band 2/3 who scores high compared to others in Bands 2/3 but less than someone in Band 1 who failed Stage 3 be put forward for interview?

It will be the same for the interview, every candidate has to reach the required standard regardless of what band you are in.

Otherwise it defeats the purpose of the process if people who scored higher earlier on but missed out due to being compared to other high scoring candidates only for candidates in lower bands with lower scores moving forward to the next stage because the scores in their band were lower overall.

It should not happen and I believe set standards are in place to ensure fairness of the recruitment campaign.

I agree with you.
But standards or not applicants who narrowly missed out would feel hard done by. I'm looking at it from their perspective.
And whether or not an applicant is willing to take the job should be taken into account by the selection board, being willing to start is an important trait for the role you would think.

ollieo

JoeyJoe93 wrote: »

I agree with you.
But standards or not applicants who narrowly missed out would feel hard done by. I'm looking at it from their perspective.
And whether or not an applicant is willing to take the job should be taken into account by the selection board, being willing to start is an important trait for the role you would think.

That's a fair point, I'm not disagreeing with you in regard to deferring the role,I wouldn't advise it myself as the person may not get called again but it has been a lengthy process so people's circumstances change.

If you fail a stage, it doesn't matter if people who got further than you don't take it up, it's up to the person to meet the standard set out, if you meet the standard then it's to your benefit if other candidates drop out as it shortens your waiting time.

Rothmans

JoeyJoe93 wrote: »

And whether or not an applicant is willing to take the job should be taken into account by the selection board, being willing to start is an important trait for the role you would think.

What you're saying makes no sense. By that logic, anyone who is looking for a job, of any kind, should only apply for one job at a time, just in case they get more than one job offer (which would mean that they would obviously have to turn the other jobs down). There's always going to be plenty of competition when applying for any job. And the competition will no doubt have applied for other jobs too.