Due to high volume....jk, not even a reply

Former Member

I've just graduated with a Second Class Honours degree, doing a MSc next year, and have experience within the NHS from spending a couple of weeks in a Microbiology department. But I've been applying for jobs as lab assistant, associate practitioner etc, and not one of them has even sent out a generic email saying, due to high volume, you did not meet criteria etc.

Does anyone else wonder if they are getting it so wrong? It sounds like HR these days wants bloomin' unicorns for employees, their requirements are that elusive. I'm even considering doing college courses for IT skills etc, but even then, they'd probably look and say "oh very good, this person completed "Competent speed-of-light typing and spreadsheet wizard" course at HelpMe College and forked out hundreds of pounds despite having just spend 4 years accumulating knowledge and debt....but wait, this other person says they've secretly been living in our storage cupboard for 5 years, they'll know where all the petri dishes are kept, into the interview pile!"

Gone are the days when only a few people went to uni, when industry meant jobs and apprenticeships were available at age 15, and you only carried on with studying if you wanted a seriously professional role in life. More and more people are forced to continue with education and gather obscure skills, undergo psychometric testing which don't truly reveal anything about the individual.


Sorry that turned into a bit of a rant there, it is just so hard for this age group to try and get into the working world, some have it easy, others harder than they imagined. If you could think of a solution what would it be? :chin:

Former Member

I know this isnt much help but what really gets on my nerves is that I want a career in HR, I have spent 3 years working in HR including as a HR Manager and I'm currently doing my final year of my degree on a part time/distant learning basis and I cant secure an interview for another HR role unless its HR admin and then i get to interview to be told im over qualified...however one of my friends who i went to uni with when i was studying full time has just secured a job as a HR Business Partner which is higher than a manager role, even though she has no experience, all because she has a degree...that really frustrates me when i have spent years getting both a qualification and experience!

Former Member

My goodness are you serious?! It's usually the other way round isn't it? I don't know what your opinion is of HR approach to seeking candidates these days, but it seems truly baffling. I've even heard that sometimes they'll pick names out of hats or randomly select CV papers and then chuck away a pile without even looking at it

Former Member

Shychick wrote: »

I've even heard that sometimes they'll pick names out of hats or randomly select CV papers and then chuck away a pile without even looking at it

I can see where rumours like that would come from, but in my experience the shortlisting process is taken incredibly seriously. Sometimes when we have shortlisted we have had to be really strict on our requirements from candidates on essential criteria just because of the sheer volume.

Not replying at all, although it's really common, I think is really poor.

Former Member

I agree with piccolo - that does sound like rumours...or if that's true - I would question whether I would really want to work for a company like that because to me that's not the way I believe colleagues should be valued.

On the other hand, although recruitment is centrally through HR - you often find they are just the ones doing the processing and in actual fact the department managers are the ones doing the interviewing/shortlisting, etc.

As a HR "professional" I certainly don't treat potential applications in that way and know that our company have strict policies to follow when it comes to shortlisting, etc.

Former Member

It's good to know that not everyone in HR approaches application processing in the same way. True about department managers and so on, I just can't help wondering what makes them choose certain candidates above others! I know there are a million possibilities with this, and does it come down to the individuals in the end, what they have or do not have. For once, I'd love to be a mind reader!

Former Member

Most companies these days will follow a relatively strict process that is as similar for every candidate as possible. One of the reasons if of course to try and get the best candidate possible, the other is often to stop them from getting sued by someone who makes a claim about discrimination. If a hell of a lot of people are applying for a small number of jobs then there will always be people who miss out, especially in a competitive environment.

Where people are consistently unhappy with a situation such as this, undoubtedly there are rumours and hear say. I remember that on this site a while back, there was a discussion about giving certain people a chance, but if an employer is choosing someone for a job they have the right to choose who they think is the best candidate. The best candidate is not always purely based on one area either.