Rincewind Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 The Government are scrapping their Universal jobmatch scheme after recognising that it is too expensive and there are too many false jobs listed.. The DWP are struggling to keep up with the sorting and deleting the backlog of false ads. It has been running less than a year. http://samedifference1.com/2014/03/17/government-plans-to-ditch-universal-jobsmatch/ I wonder what bright idea will replace it?
kingfox Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 Thank god for that. They should of kept it with how it was, a year or so back. There was nothing wrong with that system, it was easy to use, and I was applying to jobs on there with ease. Since this came into fruition a year back, I have to say I only ever used it once or twice. Instead of looking on there, I decided to look on the likes of Indeed more, & write down as many shops in Town, Fosse Park etc... & go on there websites. If they went back to the old system, I think people would be happy.
Rincewind Posted 17 March 2014 Author Posted 17 March 2014 Problem is it is not being done untintil the contract ends in 2016 which is ridiculous. If you were sacked from your job would they let you stay for two years before leaving? It's the same with Atos. When I used it I found no end of jobs that did not have the right details or no details. All the government departments had to do would be to test the site out for themselves occasionally to see if they were working.
ADK Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 Yes it's pretty useless as a job search tool. I'm not convinced any of the online search tools are that good though. It all boils down to money though.
danny. Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 Yes it's pretty useless as a job search tool. I'm not convinced any of the online search tools are that good though. It all boils down to money though. They didn't have to spend almost 18million on it though. I have been a web developer for almost 10 years, involved in building web apps and systems (very similar to this) so am familiar with what would be involved, it's basically just a directory site, with a search function and a distance calculator. It also will have an admin area for moderation/review and logins for employers to post, and the same for people to apply. I would hugely struggle to justify even 100k for it, using a rate of say £100/hour - literally no idea how it came to what it did. The design side is horrendous too, looks like an IT department intern had a go at it in PowerPoint.
AndWhat? Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 Good. As an employer trying to put an advert up it was ridiculously confusing. Needed to remember about 4 separate passwords and government gateway id's and other bollocks
ADK Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 It's a shame that jobseekers will probably still be mandated to use it until the contract is up despite the fact that everyone has admitted it's shit and nobody is going to want to put a serious advert up there.
Jon the Hat Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 They didn't have to spend almost 18million on it though. I have been a web developer for almost 10 years, involved in building web apps and systems (very similar to this) so am familiar with what would be involved, it's basically just a directory site, with a search function and a distance calculator. It also will have an admin area for moderation/review and logins for employers to post, and the same for people to apply. I would hugely struggle to justify even 100k for it, using a rate of say £100/hour - literally no idea how it came to what it did. The design side is horrendous too, looks like an IT department intern had a go at it in PowerPoint. Government IT incompetence shocker. Should have used Monster or someone to do it.
ADK Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 They didn't have to spend almost 18million on it though. I have been a web developer for almost 10 years, involved in building web apps and systems (very similar to this) so am familiar with what would be involved, it's basically just a directory site, with a search function and a distance calculator. It also will have an admin area for moderation/review and logins for employers to post, and the same for people to apply. I would hugely struggle to justify even 100k for it, using a rate of say £100/hour - literally no idea how it came to what it did. The design side is horrendous too, looks like an IT department intern had a go at it in PowerPoint. I don't think the site is bad, it just needs policing.
danny. Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 I don't think the site is bad, it just needs policing. For 18 million pounds it should be the most amazing website ever created.
ADK Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 What was the 18 million quid for? Doubt it would just be the design.
danny. Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 Design and build - doesn't include running costs, that's £6million/year - must have one hell of a server! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Jobmatch As Monster developed it, they probably copy/pasted much of the code too.
Leicesterpool Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 I've just come from the job centre this morning and they want me to sign up to this site!
Rincewind Posted 17 March 2014 Author Posted 17 March 2014 Also found something else out. It is a legal right for you to be able to make a recording of an interview at a job centre providing no other member of the public is involved. There is a vid on YouTube showing a manager trying to refuse a woman. If the interviewer does not want to be interviewed they have to find another,a private room or re-arrange the appointment.
ADK Posted 17 March 2014 Posted 17 March 2014 I've just come from the job centre this morning and they want me to sign up to this site! Yeah it's mandatory and they tell you to tick a box that allows them to see when you've been logged in. In fact it's the only thing they have bothered to check I've done so far and I've been signed on for over a month.
Rincewind Posted 17 March 2014 Author Posted 17 March 2014 You do not have to tick the box. That is a choice and private information. It would explain the high number of sanctions.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.