Skip to main content

Notes on JC + Adverts

I'm sure this will be an ongoing series. It's been clear to me for a while that there is something amiss in the processes used by the DWP to advertise the vacancies they receive. Some of these, in fact most, are sourced from recruitment agencies, specifically sites online. This is evident in the formatting errors caused by directly copying the text from the screen. Copy and paste from the site's page and into Word/Notepad and you can see how disjointed the text is.
Last I signed on I was given a part time admin vacancy to apply for, even though, net, my income would be no more than a few quid above the JSA. (What's the bloody point? How does that help me?) I rang up when I got home and the relevant contact was on a week's holiday. So I have just rung again (I don't want the job at all, I'm not remotely interested in admin nor do I have experience thereof) only to find that the job isn't, as the advert says, 'experience preferred'; it's experience required. I sounded rather sheepish on the phone as i had to admit that I have no experience of this at all. I tried to explain that this is what the JC does (as opposed to being perceived as blaming the employer, which I don't).
So be warned: I believe the JC also subtly change the words, and thus conditions, the employer wants. Of course I can't prove this so I'm on shaky ground here, but why else do these adverts get it wrong? We all know of such examples I'm sure. They may think they are doing this for the right reasons, but the end result is a pissed off employer and a claimant on thin ice whose time has been wasted.


Popular posts from this blog

I Fucking Hate the Work Programme

That did not go well.
My legs were wobbly to begin with as I closed in on the church that passes for the office of the employment wing of the Salvation Army. My appointment was 3 to half past. I really did feel sick. Pretty early on, when he asked for the forms he gave me last time to fill in, I knew that what was arranged on the letter (a short interview with me bringing my CV and jobsearch) was actually going to be much longer. I also knew that, come half three when I had to leave to catch my bus back ten minutes later, I was going to have problems. 
Unfortunately, though more for me I fear, it never got that far; at 20 past he terminated the interview citing my apparent 'putting up barriers' as the reason not to continue. This was because I refused consent for him to keep my CV. I asked why he needed it and offered, three times, to show it to him (that's all), he said it was to apply for jobs on my behalf. The EEC's need this information.
What's an EEC? Employm…

Anybody Out There?

Just so I can be sure this is being read at all and decide whether it's worth continuing, please shout out in the comments. Even if you think I'm talking barmy bollocks, it'd be helpful to know if there are people reading this and not weird bots from phishing sites or Russian hackers or some weird sentient algorithm.

Apologies if you are none of those things, but I'm considering what to do with this blog.



Thursday today (unless time has confused me again!), the day between yesterday's appointment with The Psychologist, and signing on tomorrow. A brief oasis for me to discuss said appointment as it was a test for 'neurodiverse tendencies'. I think that's the best way of putting it; it's all a bit vague really. When I first saw The Psychologist I mentioned that I was in the process of trying to get a diagnosis for Aspergers to which she replied she could do a test that, while not an official diagnosis, could count towards one - or something. Something official anyway, though bizarrely after the test was completed (took a couple of hours) she said she wasn't trained for Aspergers specifically.

The test itself was a kind of Krypton Factor lite (sans exercise course): a mix of recall, pattern recognition, problem solving, and questionnaire. I was asked to arrange coloured blocks into a prescribed pattern, to spot what was missing from a series of pictures, to guess fr…