Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
leicsmac

Job Hunting

By leicsmac, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, pleatout said:

Wow!

 

You really want to go with this dont you.  

 

No, not really. The unintentional irony at this stage is a staggering as it is hilarious.

 

10 hours ago, pleatout said:

Ok, read the following Local NHS Trust recruitment policy

 

https://www.leicspart.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Recruitment-and-Selection-Policy-Exp-Mar-26.pdf

 

13.7 onwards.  You can argue with the policy if you like but it does say "Applicants will be expected to meet the appropriate essential criteria for the position as identified on the person specification for this stage of the selection process." 

 

Yes - that is a given and that is not in dispute here.

 

What I am challenging is your claim that the Person Specification will tell you  "EVERYTHING that you need to know" and that you are always automatically shortlisted if you address the mandatory criteria of the PS - both of which are utter nonsense. I have attempted to explain to you why, but you have completely disregarded it. I suggest that you refer back to my previous post. 

 

Moreover, to add to my previous post, you will often find the KPIs and the Key Accountabilities listed in the Job Description. I'm looking at a Band 4 Nursing Associate Role now as an example and there is a wealth of information beyond the Person Specification encompassing sections such as role purpose, role context, trust values, key competencies, deliverables, infection control, safeguarding, sustainability, equality and diversity, responsibilities, even an organisational structure. In contrast, there is a paucity of information contained in the Personal Specification which provides scant details relating to any of the latter. The weighting is all on the JD. 

 

I'm also curious, When you stated that the PS will tell you "EVERYTHING that you need to know" are you actually suggesting that a statement does not require any research around the trust or the hospital itself and its service users?

 

10 hours ago, pleatout said:

BTW it mentions the JD 3 times.  And NOT in the context you think it does.

How so?

 

So you are still adamant that the JD should be completely disregarded?

 

To remind you of what you said...

 

On 29/01/2024 at 22:59, pleatout said:

Tips for anyone applying - look at the person specification.  It will tell you EVERYTHING!  

Which is demonstrably false.

 

And this...

 

On 29/01/2024 at 22:59, pleatout said:

Hit all the mandatorys and they have to short list you (unless there are hundreds that meet the essentials and then they draw applications out at random). 

This is absolutely atrocious advice.

 

Also, I've just noticed this too -

 

On 29/01/2024 at 22:59, pleatout said:

Prep for interview is come up with an example for all the mandatory requirements.  Questions will be "tell me about a time when you have...".  They arent allowed to use hypotheticals.

 

This is also incorrect and hugely misleading. The NHS do not solely use competency based questioning, but pioneered VBI having adopted it from the NSPCC following the Warner Report “Choosing with Care” (1992) and a desire to improve the way in which organisations select staff to work in positions of trust with vulnerable people. Contrary to your claim, this is based upon hypothetical scenarios. I'm looking at a VBI matrix now for a current Band 5 NQ Physio role and it's full of them. The organisation also typically employs motivational interviewing (which invites greater depth than competency based interviews) and questions relating to technical/operational insight. 

 

Hope this helps. :thumbup:

 

Edited by SpacedX
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pleatout

pleatout

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

So what we've gathered is the PS tells you the skills/experience you need and the JD tells you the context those skills are to be applied in. 

Looking solely at one or the other will disadvantage you.

 

Correct.  However I didn't say don't read the jd.  That will describe what they want you to do. What i said was concentrate on answering the mandatories in the ps, because if you don't meet the mandatories you aren't getting an interview.  In fact, if you do meet all the essentials, unless there are too many applicants to interview them all, you WILL get an interview 

 

The person short listing will not be swayed by flim flam and waffle around things in the jd.  They will go down the essentials in the ps and tick them off.

 

If it says you must have a driving licence in the ps, no amount of research, mentioning of trust values, real life jd examples will get you on the short list if you answer that question with a no.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, pleatout said:

Correct.  However I didn't say don't read the jd.  That will describe what they want you to do.

You said that the PS will tell you "EVERYTHING that you need to know". Which is not true.

 

2 hours ago, pleatout said:

In fact, if you do meet all the essentials, unless there are too many applicants to interview them all, you WILL get an interview 

That's not necessarily true. 

 

2 hours ago, pleatout said:

The person short listing will not be swayed by flim flam and waffle around things in the jd.  They will go down the essentials in the ps and tick them off.

Absolutely agree with this. But no one is suggested that one churns out waffle "around things in the JD". A feeble strawman arguement.

 

2 hours ago, pleatout said:

If it says you must have a driving licence in the ps, no amount of research, mentioning of trust values, real life jd examples will get you on the short list if you answer that question with a no.

Again, no one is suggesting otherwise - or that the PS should be ignored, or, that you shouldn't concentrate on evidencing all of the criteria. Also, this may be corroborated later during interview and is indicated as such. 

 

 

Edited by SpacedX
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pleatout

pleatout

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SpacedX said:

No, not really. The unintentional irony at this stage is a staggering as it is hilarious.

 

Yes - that is a given and that is not in dispute here.

 

What I am challenging is your claim that the Person Specification will tell you  "EVERYTHING that you need to know" and that you are always automatically shortlisted if you address the mandatory criteria of the PS - both of which are utter nonsense. I have attempted to explain to you why, but you have completely disregarded it. I suggest that you refer back to my previous post. 

 

Moreover, to add to my previous post, you will often find the KPIs and the Key Accountabilities listed in the Job Description. I'm looking at a Band 4 Nursing Associate Role now as an example and there is a wealth of information beyond the Person Specification encompassing sections such as role purpose, role context, trust values, key competencies, deliverables, infection control, safeguarding, sustainability, equality and diversity, responsibilities, even an organisational structure. In contrast, there is a paucity of information contained in the Personal Specification which provides scant details relating to any of the latter. The weighting is all on the JD. 

 

I'm also curious, When you stated that the PS will tell you "EVERYTHING that you need to know" are you actually suggesting that a statement does not require any research around the trust or the hospital itself and its service users?

 

How so?

 

So you are still adamant that the JD should be completely disregarded?

 

To remind you of what you said...

 

And this...

 

This is absolutely atrocious advice.

 

Also, I've just noticed this too -

 

 

This is also incorrect and hugely misleading. The NHS do not solely use competency based questioning, but pioneered VBI having adopted it from the NSPCC following the Warner Report “Choosing with Care” (1992) and a desire to improve the way in which organisations select staff to work in positions of trust with. Contrary to your claim, this is based upon hypothetical scenarios. I'm looking at a VBI matrix now for a current Band 5 NQ Physio role and it's full of them. The organisation also typically employs motivational interviewing (which invites greater depth than competency based interviews) and questions relating to technical/operational insight. 

 

Hope this helps. :thumbup:

 

. OK, so you are trying to prove that you are right when faced with overwhelming evidence.

 

You trying to say that somone that does shortlisting and I interviewing within the NHS is wrong and you continue to argue when shown evidence from the NHS jobs website and a local nhs policy.

 

I have argued with toddlers, brexiteers, flat earthers and antivaxers before. im not sure if you are any or all of these but there comes a time when it has been proven you are wrong and nothing I can say will change that,

 

l leave it to those job hunting to work out which advice is the more valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
Just now, pleatout said:

. OK, so you are trying to prove that you are right when faced with overwhelming evidence.

What "overwhelming evidence"?

 

Just now, pleatout said:

You trying to say that somone that does shortlisting and I interviewing within the NHS is wrong and you continue to argue when shown evidence from the NHS jobs website and a local nhs policy.

I'm not "trying" to say anything. I'm pointing out that your contention that the Person Specification will tell you "EVERYTHING that you need to know" is demonstrably untrue and very misleading advice. Your appeals to your own authority or cherry picking are irrelevant. Furthermore, at no stage am I suggesting that an applicant shouldn't evidence all the essential criteria on the Person Specification.

 

3 minutes ago, pleatout said:

I have argued with toddlers, brexiteers, flat earthers and antivaxers before. im not sure if you are any or all of these but there comes a time when it has been proven you are wrong and nothing I can say will change that,

As you know, it isn't possible to "argue" or debate with those individuals. I have simply implored you to actually read my responses and answer my questions as opposed to reacting emotionally and indignantly or flagrantly disregarding the content. 

 

5 minutes ago, pleatout said:

l leave it .

Is that a promise this time?

 

5 minutes ago, pleatout said:

to those job hunting to work out which advice is the more valuable.

I'm fairly confident that most will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
grobyfox1990

grobyfox1990

Posted
Posted

This is some fantastic forensic interrogation of quotes and not one person calling for a peer-reviewed study in sight, I wish I could see your usernames because this is what a football forum should/could be used for. Can either of you take down the post on the atmosphere thread claiming all matches in the great escape season went to general sale alongside the raft of other falsities? Before you get banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stadt

Stadt

Posted
Posted

I'm in the market for a new role, I have extensive experience in football as a youth coach, academy director, director of football and horse racing.

 

Anything coming up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Manini

Manini

Posted
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Stadt said:

I'm in the market for a new role, I have extensive experience in football as a youth coach, academy director, director of football and horse racing.

 

Anything coming up?

Do you know anything about FMCG? No? Good. Come and run this Duty Free business. 

Edited by Manini
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Stadt said:

I'm in the market for a new role, I have extensive experience in football as a youth coach, academy director, director of football and horse racing.

 

Anything coming up?

You’ve not said how good your fax skills are.
 

When was the last fax machine operating course you attended? Was it certified? 
 

Also, how are you at conducting internal reviews into systemic failure? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stadt

Stadt

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Daggers said:

You’ve not said how good your fax skills are.
 

When was the last fax machine operating course you attended? Was it certified? 
 

Also, how are you at conducting internal reviews into systemic failure? 

I'm too good, whenever I've reviewed my prior conduct - I've found absolutely nothing wrong. 100% effective apart from functions where other people have had a hand in, it was all their fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zear0

Zear0

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Silebyfox_89 said:

Possibly the worse thread on FT.

NHS Job Advert-gate or the managerial David Brent 101 quotes we started with?

Edited by Zear0
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
urban fox

urban fox

Posted
Posted

Before I packed in working I had my own consultancy business. Whenever I was hiring, regardless of the position I always stated the salary/benefits package on the adverts. If the post was a junior one, then it was also made clear that there would be opportunities for training and development for the right people. I found this tended to attract a better calibration of candidates.

when I worked freelance, I was so fed up of recruiters contacting me with offers of “competitive rates” which were invariably half of what I was currently charging for my services. So much time is wasted on both sides of the process because of the lack of transparency on remuneration and expectations of some job seekers.

Those people who knew me through previous engagement or networking (most of my work was within a fairly nepotistic arena where there were perhaps only a few companies with the size and capabilities to undertake the work) knew my worth and would approach me directly if they wanted to hire. (So yes it is sometimeswho you know as well)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MPH

MPH

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, urban fox said:

Before I packed in working I had my own consultancy business. Whenever I was hiring, regardless of the position I always stated the salary/benefits package on the adverts. If the post was a junior one, then it was also made clear that there would be opportunities for training and development for the right people. I found this tended to attract a better calibration of candidates.

when I worked freelance, I was so fed up of recruiters contacting me with offers of “competitive rates” which were invariably half of what I was currently charging for my services. So much time is wasted on both sides of the process because of the lack of transparency on remuneration and expectations of some job seekers.

Those people who knew me through previous engagement or networking (most of my work was within a fairly nepotistic arena where there were perhaps only a few companies with the size and capabilities to undertake the work) knew my worth and would approach me directly if they wanted to hire. (So yes it is sometimeswho you know as well)

 

 

I'm sorry to be a boblet but did you mean  caliber of candidates?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...