Not Shortlisted but meet requirements.

bingbong500

I applied for a grade 5 position for a local authority/hse/etc job, and got a reply saying thanks but no thanks, we have done shortlisting and you did not meet the cut. Ok, but I have seen the criteria and I have everything they asked for and more.
Would you ask the recruiters for more information about why you were not shortlisted? Is there any point to doing so, would they have notes that they could or would share?

I don't want to make a big fuss about it as I am in the job as a grade 4 on a temporary contract, but I would like to know why they turned me down.

Any advice?

mtoutlemonde

bingbong500 wrote: »

I applied for a grade 5 position for a local authority/hse/etc job, and got a reply saying thanks but no thanks, we have done shortlisting and you did not meet the cut. Ok, but I have seen the criteria and I have everything they asked for and more.
Would you ask the recruiters for more information about why you were not shortlisted? Is there any point to doing so, would they have notes that they could or would share?

I don't want to make a big fuss about it as I am in the job as a grade 4 on a temporary contract, but I would like to know why they turned me down.

Any advice?

You are entitled to the shortlisting criteria. Email the person/HR whoever contacted you and request the criteria. If you meet the requirements, appeal the decision.

Mrs OBumble

You have no idea how many other applicants also met or exceeded the criteria. Likely the shortlist is only the top few.

Make informal enquiries for sure about how you can do better next time, but don't make things difficult or you won't have a hope in future.

bingbong500

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You have no idea how many other applicants also met or exceeded the criteria. Likely the shortlist is only the top few.

Make informal enquiries for sure about how you can do better next time, but don't make things difficult or you won't have a hope in future.

I do know, 40% of applicants were shortlisted. And all shortlisting is supposedly anonymous so it shouldn't in theory make any difference.

Jim2007

bingbong500 wrote: »

I do know, 40% of applicants were shortlisted. And all shortlisting is supposedly anonymous so it shouldn't in theory make any difference.

You met the minimum criteria to be considered... there are many people on here who can look at a particular job and say oh ya I'm in the running for that.... but the reality is that over all your resume etc... was not among the best people available to take up the position. It is the normal basis for most people not getting a particular job.

OMM 0000

Jim2007 wrote: »

You met the minimum criteria to be considered... there are many people on here who can look at a particular job and say oh ya I'm in the running for that.... but the reality is that over all your resume etc... was not among the best people available to take up the position. It is the normal basis for most people not getting a particular job.

This exactly.

The reality is a lot of people are suitable for a lot of jobs. So the employer has to make the cut somehow. A typical way is to just keep the very best resumes, and cut the rest. That means some good applicants won't be considered.

Hiring the right people is tricky. It's not quite a science yet.

Jim2007

OMM 0000 wrote: »

A typical way is to just keep the very best resumes, and cut the rest. That means some good applicants won't be considered.

It probably means a lot of people think they have written a good resume when in reality they have not!

- There is the obvious stuff like spelling etc
- A failure to be to concise and to the point
- paragraphs filled with buzze words, but lacking any information about the candidate
- failure to follow instructions: if you are asked to submit a word document and you send a PDF, you’ve already demonstrated an inability to follow instructions!
- outsourced resumes: yes some of those services write good documents, but when you end up with 10 of them you know a lot about the agent and not much about the candidates

Riskymove

This is the wording PAS use for example:

While a candidate may meet the eligibility requirements of the competition, if the numbers applying for the position are such that it would not be practical to interview everyone, the Public Appointments Service may decide that a smaller number will be called to the next stage of the selection process. In this respect, the Public Appointments Service provide for the employment of a shortlisting process to select a group who, based on an examination of the application forms, appear to be the most suitable for the position.

This is not to suggest that other candidates are necessarily unsuitable or incapable of undertaking the job, rather that there are some candidates, who based on their application, appear to be better qualified and/or have more relevant experience.

bingbong500

Jim2007 wrote: »

You met the minimum criteria to be considered... there are many people on here who can look at a particular job and say oh ya I'm in the running for that.... but the reality is that over all your resume etc... was not among the best people available to take up the position. It is the normal basis for most people not getting a particular job.

I'm sorry but no. There is a very particular process for Local Authority recruitment and your comment has no relevance to it. There is no resume. There is an application form, and if you meet the 1st criteria you are assessed for the second, if you meet the 2nd you are assessed for the third,and so on.
I was scored as not meeting the 2nd criteria when in fact I did meet it, and so was not assessed for the 3rd or 4th criteria.

PAS is for the Civil Service, I am talking specifically about LA, its different and specific.

Gumbo

bingbong500 wrote: »

I'm sorry but no. There is a very particular process for Local Authority recruitment and your comment has no relevance to it. There is no resume. There is an application form, and if you meet the 1st criteria you are assessed for the second, if you meet the 2nd you are assessed for the third,and so on.
I was scored as not meeting the 2nd criteria when in fact I did meet it, and so was not assessed for the 3rd or 4th criteria.

PAS is for the Civil Service, I am talking specifically about LA, its different and specific.

It’s just possible that others met the criteria more than yourself.
Once you meet the minimum qualifications then you are deemed a valid applicant.

After that, the person with a PHD may get shortlisted over the person with a post grad even though the minimum criteria was only a level 8 degree.

By all means ask HR where you fell short. Tell them you’d like to work on your short comings for future positions. Then you’ll know if they dismissed you incorrectly.

For example. Last year my LA were looking for a series of Technical inspectors for a particular area. Many people applied and were fully qualified to do the job based on the minimum requirements, but the 4 people that got the job had formal qualifications in the subject field even though they were not required.

Are you an internal applicant or external? Also was the job advertised internally or publicly?


Also, the PAS appoint positions to the load authorities too.

bumders

Don't think it personally. I was in a team of 11 IT staff and three were selected for a managers position for interview. I was not one of them. One of the guys was the least IT technical and was in the bottom technical wise on the team and he got the managers position. He was actually the best person for the role and is thriving in it. Senior Management knew he would be good at it even though he was crap in his current role.

bingbong500

kceire wrote: »

It’s just possible that others met the criteria more than yourself.
Once you meet the minimum qualifications then you are deemed a valid applicant.

After that, the person with a PHD may get shortlisted over the person with a post grad even though the minimum criteria was only a level 8 degree.

By all means ask HR where you fell short. Tell them you’d like to work on your short comings for future positions. Then you’ll know if they dismissed you incorrectly.

For example. Last year my LA were looking for a series of Technical inspectors for a particular area. Many people applied and were fully qualified to do the job based on the minimum requirements, but the 4 people that got the job had formal qualifications in the subject field even though they were not required.

Are you an internal applicant or external? Also was the job advertised internally or publicly?


Also, the PAS appoint positions to the load authorities too.

I'm afraid you are not reading what was written. It's not about other people meeting the requirements more. It's a yes or no to whether you meet a requirement. It's not a ranking or a placement of one above another at this point. Its "does this applicant have X, yes or no. If yes, shortlisted. If no, not shortlisted".

PAS as in no way involved in this process.

Gumbo

bingbong500 wrote: »

I'm afraid you are not reading what was written. It's not about other people meeting the requirements more. It's a yes or no to whether you meet a requirement. It's not a ranking or a placement of one above another at this point. Its "does this applicant have X, yes or no. If yes, shortlisted. If no, not shortlisted".

PAS as in no way involved in this process.

Shortlisting takes place based on valid applications.
You sound like your application was valid but it wasn’t shortlisted from the pool of applicants.

That’s normal. It’s not a yes or no to shortlisting. Shortlisting doesn’t come into it until all applications are valid and pooled together.

I don’t know what you keep mentioning the PAS, I was only pointing out that your were incorrect in saying the PAS don’t get involved in LA appointmenat when they do.

Steve

bingbong500 wrote: »

I'm afraid you are not reading what was written. It's not about other people meeting the requirements more. It's a yes or no to whether you meet a requirement. It's not a ranking or a placement of one above another at this point. Its "does this applicant have X, yes or no. If yes, shortlisted. If no, not shortlisted".

PAS as in no way involved in this process.

Your posts seem to suggest you think you were 'entitled' to a job just because you met the minimum requirements.

Real life doesn't work like that unfortunately.

I suggest you learn from the experience and move on.

bingbong500

Steve wrote: »

Your posts seem to suggest you think you were 'entitled' to a job just because you met the minimum requirements.

Real life doesn't work like that unfortunately.

I suggest you learn from the experience and move on.

It really did not.

Look, its clear that those answering do not have any experience or knowledge of the very particular process I am referring to, so thanks for the input, but I will have to speak to people who do know the specific method I am posting about.

Not all shortlisting is the same and none of the answers here are applicable to the process I have outlined.

Steve

bingbong500 wrote: »

It really did not.

Look, its clear that those answering do not have any experience or knowledge of the very particular process I am referring to, so thanks for the input, but I will have to speak to people who do know the specific method I am posting about.

Not all shortlisting is the same and none of the answers here are applicable to the process I have outlined.

Perhaps you should explain further then.

No offence intended but how is anyone on the internet supposed to know the specifics of your situation unless you explain them.

FluffPiece

PAS can also be used for local authority recruiting also, it is not used solely for the civil service. However a grade v is usually an in house recruitment process carried out by the LA itself.

An independent shortlisting board may have been used to whittle the number of applicants down to a manageable number to be interviewed. Chances are that while you believe you should have been shortlisted, you may have left something important out of your application form that was truly relevant. I would assume it was a competency based application form so it's possible one of your answers was not fully in keeping with the relevant competency. I've seen this happen. Compare the answers you gave to the competency framework / pillars and see if it's in keeping as well.

It's always possible to put in a written query to the relevant AO and they should inquire with the person looking after the competition to ensure nothing went amiss at any stage either. It's usual for decisions to stand from my experience but all queries were normally investigated quite quickly.

FluffPiece

bingbong500 wrote: »

I do know, 40% of applicants were shortlisted.

Don't be so sure. I have lost count of the number of people who come to me with figures and facts about how many people were called for interview or how many positions are actually available for a competition. Every single time, the person is convinced they are correct and have great inside knowledge. I'd say 1 in 20 was correct. The vast majority haven't got a clue and those who do usually keep quiet about it. I'd just nod and be non committal in these circumstances.

Mrs OBumble

bingbong500 wrote: »

It really did not.

Look, its clear that those answering do not have any experience or knowledge of the very particular process I am referring to, so thanks for the input, but I will have to speak to people who do know the specific method I am posting about.

Not all shortlisting is the same and none of the answers here are applicable to the process I have outlined.

Shortlising.

The clue is in the name.

They take all the valid applications, and make a shorter list from the best ones, so they don't need to waste time interviewing people who don't stand a chance because there are better applicants.

Maybe there was a first step when all the invalid applications were removed. If you were incorrectly removed at this step, you'd have reason to be annoyed. But there's no way you'd know about this.

Squatter

bingbong500 wrote: »

It really did not.

Look, its clear that those answering do not have any experience or knowledge of the very particular process I am referring to, so thanks for the input, but I will have to speak to people who do know the specific method I am posting about.

Not all shortlisting is the same and none of the answers here are applicable to the process I have outlined.

Although I don't have a clue about you, your qualifications or the position that you applied for, I am beginning to see why you may not have made the short list.

Gumbo

FluffPiece wrote: »

PAS can also be used for local authority recruiting also, it is not used solely for the civil service. However a grade v is usually an in house recruitment process carried out by the LA itself.

An independent shortlisting board may have been used to whittle the number of applicants down to a manageable number to be interviewed. Chances are that while you believe you should have been shortlisted, you may have left something important out of your application form that was truly relevant. I would assume it was a competency based application form so it's possible one of your answers was not fully in keeping with the relevant competency. I've seen this happen. Compare the answers you gave to the competency framework / pillars and see if it's in keeping as well.

It's always possible to put in a written query to the relevant AO and they should inquire with the person looking after the competition to ensure nothing went amiss at any stage either. It's usual for decisions to stand from my experience but all queries were normally investigated quite quickly.

+1
LA can appoint up to grade 6 internally.
Grade 7 can be internally interviewed but it also must be advertised on their own website for external applicants.
Grade 8 has to go to the PAS.

Gumbo

bingbong500 wrote: »

It really did not.

Look, its clear that those answering do not have any experience or knowledge of the very particular process I am referring to, so thanks for the input, but I will have to speak to people who do know the specific method I am posting about.

Not all shortlisting is the same and none of the answers here are applicable to the process I have outlined.

It’s becoming clear why you may not have been shortlisted. Some of us on here have been actively involved in recruitment within the LA network but you choose not to accept those opinions.

Good luck waiting for the answer you want to hear.

bingbong500

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Shortlising.

The clue is in the name.

They take all the valid applications, and make a shorter list from the best ones, so they don't need to waste time interviewing people who don't stand a chance because there are better applicants.

Maybe there was a first step when all the invalid applications were removed. If you were incorrectly removed at this step, you'd have reason to be annoyed. But there's no way you'd know about this.

No again, you are wrong. I do know about this. You, on the other hand, do not.

But again, thanks for the input.


As I said previously, there is a very specific way this happens, in this LA. I am not guessing or dealing in rumours. I know how it works and what the outcome was.

bingbong500

kceire wrote: »

It’s becoming clear why you may not have been shortlisted. Some of us on here have been actively involved in recruitment within the LA network but you choose not to accept those opinions.

Good luck waiting for the answer you want to hear.

Some of us here....like me. Which is the point.

You seem to think you know more about a specific situation that I am involved in than I do. That's a pretty odd assumption for you to make.

Jim2007

bingbong500 wrote: »

Some of us here....like me. Which is the point.

You seem to think you know more about a specific situation that I am involved in than I do. That's a pretty odd assumption for you to make.

Well if even one of the people involved in the short listening knew you or knew of you, then it is obvious to most of us what happened.

Is the process different to this?
From a random Clare County Council document:
'Selection Procedure
The following are the key steps in the selection procedure
12.1 Screening
In the first instance, all applications will be screened for eligibility using the
principles of the eligibility criteria, where appropriate. Applicants who
possess the required eligibility criteria will be progressed to the next stage of
the selection process. The local authority may request verification of
education qualification (for example result transcripts) at this stage of the
selection process.
12.2 Shortlisting
Where a large number of applications are received for a post, the Council
reserves the right to shortlist as required.
12.3 Other Selection Methods
The selection process may involve additional assessments, tests or
interviews. Applicants will be notified of these additional stages, if applicable.
12.4 Interview Procedure
Interviews shall be carried out in line with the agreed interview board
procedures'

Riskymove

bingbong500 wrote: »

No
As I said previously, there is a very specific way this happens, in this LA. I am not guessing or dealing in rumours. I know how it works and what the outcome was.

are you confusing screening with shortlisting?

what you outline seems more screening than shortlisting

e.g.

1 you need a degree
if yes move to 2 if not you are out

2. need 5 years experience
if yes move to 3 etc etc

bingbong500

No. It's shortlisting. Thats how it works here.

I have no idea why I'm trying to explain to people who are both wrong and rude about it at the same time.

Thanks so much for the input though

bingbong500

bingbong500 wrote: »

You seem to think you know more about a specific situation that I am involved in than I do. That's a pretty odd assumption for you to make.

Step 1: Don't make the cut
Step 2: Go online asking why you didn't make it
Step 3: Dismiss any advice offered, claiming you know better
Step 4: ?????
Step 5: PROFIT!


Why the hell would you ask for people's opinion if you are going to dismiss anything they say that doesn't agree with your butthurt opinion of why you didn't make it? You sound like a 'great driver' who's failed their driving test, yet again, because of 'quotas' or some other made up BS.


Read between the lines: You didn't cut the mustard, tough sh1t, pull up your big boy pants and move on to the next application.

OMM 0000

bingbong500 wrote: »

No. It's shortlisting. Thats how it works here.

I have no idea why I'm trying to explain to people who are both wrong and rude about it at the same time.

Thanks so much for the input though

Well let's assume you're correct.

What can you do?

If you force them to look at your application, they're not going to give you the job. They'll be thinking 1) we didn't want to shortlist him anyway and 2) this is a pain in the ass, let's just get through this so he'll go away.

bingbong500

Deleted User wrote: »

Step 1: Don't make the cut
Step 2: Go online asking why you didn't make it
Step 3: Dismiss any advice offered, claiming you know better
Step 4: ?????
Step 5: PROFIT!


Why the hell would you ask for people's opinion if you are going to dismiss anything they say that doesn't agree with your butthurt opinion of why you didn't make it? You sound like a 'great driver' who's failed their driving test, yet again, because of 'quotas' or some other made up BS.


Read between the lines: You didn't cut the mustard, tough sh1t, pull up your big boy pants and move on to the next application.

Are you quite well?
You seem to think its not possible for someone to know more about their own life and situation than you, a complete stranger on the internet, does. Think about that for a minute and then try to be a little more polite to people asking for advice in a stressful situation.

Gumbo

bingbong500 wrote: »

No again, you are wrong. I do know about this. You, on the other hand, do not.

But again, thanks for the input.


As I said previously, there is a very specific way this happens, in this LA. I am not guessing or dealing in rumours. I know how it works and what the outcome was.

bingbong500 wrote: »

Some of us here....like me. Which is the point.

You seem to think you know more about a specific situation that I am involved in than I do. That's a pretty odd assumption for you to make.

bingbong500 wrote: »

No. It's shortlisting. Thats how it works here.

I have no idea why I'm trying to explain to people who are both wrong and rude about it at the same time.

Thanks so much for the input though

bingbong500 wrote: »

Are you quite well?
You seem to think its not possible for someone to know more about their own life and situation than you, a complete stranger on the internet, does. Think about that for a minute and then try to be a little more polite to people asking for advice in a stressful situation.

You appear to know more about the process than any of us on here, so why ask the question if you know all the answers?

SomeSayKos

bingbong500 wrote: »

Would you ask the recruiters for more information about why you were not shortlisted? Is there any point to doing so, would they have notes that they could or would share?
Any advice?

If it was later in the process ( i.e, after interview ) then I would maybe ask but not at the stage you got to as I don't think there's much point.

bingbong500

Well thanks to all for the answers, I have one from the HR department, and am now shortlisted for the job. An error was made which has now been rectified.

I would suggest in future you restrict yourselves to commenting on issues you know anything about, but then where would you get your kicks being rude to new posters?

Diceicle

bingbong500 wrote: »

I applied for a grade 5 position for a local authority/hse/etc job, and got a reply saying thanks but no thanks, we have done shortlisting and you did not meet the cut. Ok, but I have seen the criteria and I have everything they asked for and more.
Would you ask the recruiters for more information about why you were not shortlisted? Is there any point to doing so, would they have notes that they could or would share?

I don't want to make a big fuss about it as I am in the job as a grade 4 on a temporary contract, but I would like to know why they turned me down.

Any advice?

For my own clarity, as I'm somewhat familiar with the system, did you have to send in a Resumé or was there a standard application form to fill out where you would have detailed your experience against the eligibility criteria?
This could be legit and reasonable exclusion. Could also be a clerical error based on the volume of applicants they likely got. Could also be a charade that has to be done for IR reasons.

Edit: I see it was a clerical error from your post above.
Good luck in the interview.

FluffPiece

bingbong500 wrote: »

Well thanks to all for the answers, I have one from the HR department, and am now shortlisted for the job. An error was made which has now been rectified.

I would suggest in future you restrict yourselves to commenting on issues you know anything about, but then where would you get your kicks being rude to new posters?

See my first post, in particular to this piece

It's always possible to put in a written query to the relevant AO and they should inquire with the person looking after the competition to ensure nothing went amiss at any stage either.

You are a very rude person and my advice would be to take this opportunity to brush up on your personal skills before the interview because if you come across like this with the interview board, they will take a dim view of it. I shudder to think how you'll handle being a line manager for a team. Oh and as you seem to think you are the only person who knows the ins and outs, my job is as a recruiter for a large local authority, so I damn sure know what I'm talking about.

OMM 0000

bingbong500 wrote: »

Well thanks to all for the answers, I have one from the HR department, and am now shortlisted for the job. An error was made which has now been rectified.

I would suggest in future you restrict yourselves to commenting on issues you know anything about, but then where would you get your kicks being rude to new posters?

You know, you seem so rude and unreasonable that I don't believe you.

Yep, the follow up post smacks of "I'm gonna prove that I was more knowledgeable than all of you....of course the only reason I wasn't shortlisted is because of a mistake".

Steve

bingbong500 wrote: »

Well thanks to all for the answers, I have one from the HR department, and am now shortlisted for the job. An error was made which has now been rectified.

I would suggest in future you restrict yourselves to commenting on issues you know anything about, but then where would you get your kicks being rude to new posters?

I hope that if you get the job it will be taxpayers money well spent. Somehow I doubt it but will live in hope.

chooey

Hi bingbong, I was just wondering did you just ask for feedback when you contacted the HR department or did you specifically ask them why you weren't shortlisted? I haven't been short listed for a role I really thought that I would and I'm wondering also has something gone amiss. Thanks a mill, hope your interview went well

bingbong500

chooey wrote: »

Hi bingbong, I was just wondering did you just ask for feedback when you contacted the HR department or did you specifically ask them why you weren't shortlisted? I haven't been short listed for a role I really thought that I would and I'm wondering also has something gone amiss. Thanks a mill, hope your interview went well

I asked for feedback but did specifically mention the shortlisting criteria, stating that I thought I did meet the criteria as listed. They came back to me a few days later and stated that a mistake had been made (not just on mine, but I think about 5 others too) and that I did actually meet the criteria and was now shortlisted.
Contrary to what others thought on this thread there was no mystery involved, it's a very open process in the place I am referring to, the criteria are clear and well known, and it was a simple mistake.

And thanks, it went very well and I am now on the panel.

chooey

Thanks so much for that info. Getting an email together this evening. Delighted to hear you're on the panel.

jj_24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/110043667#Comment_110043667

The biggest problem is the lack of transparency.

What is the amount of applications that will be considered for interview?

What is my position in this ranking?

Just saying, we will decide a number and you weren't selected does not seem to be a fair treatment for a public competition.

What do you think about this?

jj_24

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/110051141#Comment_110051141

Is there any legal procedure that could be done?

I am not Irish and in my country, public service competitions are very very serious. They must be completely impartial and extremely transparent.

Just saying you weren't selected wouldn't be a good response. A public institution, imo should say: Why you weren't selected, and how other applicants performed.

Nody

Mod:

The last previous post is 4 years old; I think it's resolved one way or the other at this stage :)