The length of time to get a job

[st4]

Following on from this thread I applied for a job @ barlcays wealth. After not 1, not even 2 but 3 interviews I was told by the HR I was the "strongest candidate" on Tuesday and that Today I would know the terms of the offer of employment/start date I would be "likely to recieve".

All excited the phone goes, and yet more dissappointment, there has been an "administrative glitch" and another 2 weeks will go in before I will know whether I got the job. Considering I applied for this job in mid August, interviewed 3 times in Septemeber (One or maybe 2 interviews gets you a job or told no) I was told I have a 3rd Interview and I'd know very soon afterwards.

Anyone work in HR here, how does it work, is there a chance I am getting fobbed off with excuses as the credit crunch is biting and this post is actually now no more.

Considering when interview 1 was held it came apparant they needed it filled ASAP. After this set back, and another 4 weeks (after another 2 week or so delay from today) they won't fill it long before xmas. Thats a quarter of a year

I am working on a short term contract basis so on weak ground financially so natrually would want this sown up. To be fair their HR person couldn't be nicer but when questioned about the particular issue its "nothing that harms your application, just processes that haven't been followed". No real specifics or facts, just HR speak.

Rant over.

 

[crockers]

In this climate many firms are cutting back - so what they may have been told that there are some redundancies to be made and if so they have to allow internal candidates to apply for vacancies from the re-deployment pool.

It is not as bad as it sounds - because if they don't have matching skills they will not get the job but it takes up to 2 months to go through the legalities. One month for the consultation period and another for their notices to run out (if on one months notice period)

Good luck ...

 

[st4]

I'd love to know whats going on. Three interviews and not to get anything will be incredibly upsetting given that they told me I was the "strongest candidate" and I was given the impression I was "going to receive the paperwork and all the formalities".

Am I the victim of a school boy error in the HR desk? I don't know of any redundancies in barclays wealth at the moment. I just want in, its the oppertunity of a life time career wise.

 

[C240Sport97]

Barclays just bought a big chunk of Lehman, plus the current financial turmoil .. they have lots of things on their mind

I suspect that they forgot they need approval from someone high up who happens to be on holiday or which is tied up with the above

Sit tight ..

 

[W210 Fan]

can I look at the bigger picture and say of that company is that badly run and in-efficient do you want to work for them?

 

[Beetnik]

If you're the strongest candidate then I can think of two scenarios;

1. Whilst you were the strongest you still fall short of what they are looking for and they have to decide whether to offer it to you and you'll come up to spec in a reasonable time or start the recruitment process afresh and hope to attract someone with the requisite skill set already in place. Asking you back for a third interview may support this theory.

2. You meet the spec but, because of the downturn, they are now reconsidering whether to keep the post or whether it should go.

Either way, don't burn your bridges where you are.

 

[jaymanek]

Banks love to mess candidates about.. ive been on both ends having recruited on behalf of JPMorgan when i was there...

back in Uni days I was told I had a summer internship at JPMorgan (following several rounds of tough interviews).. summer came but nothing about when i should turn up for work.

A few phone calls revealed they had simply forgotten about me! Did i want to do a years internship instead...
errr no... my university didnt even allow that.. and what of my pride.. how could they just forget me? how could i be cast aside in such a manner?

so what did i do?... told my uni i had to take a year out for personal reasons and did it anyway...

Best thing that ever happened to me in the end... if it wasnt for that year out, i probably would never have been focussed enough to get the result i did in my final year...

 

[st4]

If you're the strongest candidate then I can think of two scenarios;

1. Whilst you were the strongest you still fall short of what they are looking for and they have to decide whether to offer it to you and you'll come up to spec in a reasonable time or start the recruitment process afresh and hope to attract someone with the requisite skill set already in place. Asking you back for a third interview may support this theory..

I'd hope not but the 3rd interview seemed "odd" for this. I believe there was one other candidate, and now I was identified as the strongest one. They couldn't have been bad either. The decison AFAIK that I was the one was made when i was called on Tuesday. I was expecting to be told today that I was successful officially.

2. You meet the spec but, because of the downturn, they are now reconsidering whether to keep the post or whether it should go.

Either way, don't burn your bridges where you are.

yes, this seems everlikely. I hope not, and I sincerely hope not, but considering its a bank owned organised I would not be surprised. However the post arised due to a maternity and the director needs an administrator, and it has the potential to grow into investment management once the maternity girl returns so is worth me getting.

 

[Mr E]

I had similar this year - albeit in a different industry.

Two interviews in the UK (back-to-back, one with HR, one with the UK MD). Then two trips to Zurich (overnight) paid for by the company. Then nothing for 4 weeks followed by "you were the one for the job, but we're now rethinking our strategy in light of current market conditions. We'll get back to you..."

TBH we've got financial sector clients pulling the plug on projects just about to deliver, calls not being returned, guys turning up for meetings only to find the client "isn't in the office", etc, etc. New recruits are probably the last thing on their minds at the moment....

 

[W210 Fan]

has the potential to grow into investment management once the maternity girl returns so is worth me getting.

now I`m a cynical young bugger and unless it was in writing that the post would mature into that I would not pin your hopes on it, could be a sales technique from the banks HR for the potential new employees, appearing to promise a lot without putting it in writing,

 

[st4]

now I`m a cynical young bugger and unless it was in writing that the post would mature into that I would not pin your hopes on it, could be a sales technique from the banks HR for the potential new employees, appearing to promise a lot without putting it in writing,

I've heard this re Barclays Wealth too, but its more secure than the current job which is short term contract. Well nothing is secure these days but I've invested (maybe too much) time & hope in securing this post, to get so far as to be singled out as "the best candidate" for an admin glitch to take it away.

 

[crockers]

Have packages been discussed? And I mean seriously discussed not hinted at or generally mentioned. A discussion is two way - have you told them what you expect too?

 

[st4]

Have packages been discussed? And I mean seriously discussed not hinted at or generally mentioned. A discussion is two way - have you told them what you expect too?

Yes, at all 3 interviews I was asked waht my salary was and what I was expecting, bonuses and pensions were also mentioned, and on the phone with the HR fella, he said he would like to be dealing with these "formalities" once the glitch was solved. He said it was at their end and not mine and nothing "would harm my application".

 

[Peterdon]

To be fair their HR person couldn't be nicer but when questioned about the particular issue its "nothing that harms your application, just processes that haven't been followed". No real specifics or facts, just HR speak.

My wife is an HR Director in a multinational company. Her view on this is that because of the current economic climate and resulting banking redundancies procedures in new recruiting have to be (and seen to be) followed to the letter. Ever i dotted and t crossed, so a delay like this can easily happen. They don't want to lay themselves open to claims from other staff who are on the way out.

She also feels that if they have decided they no longer wish to recruit you for whatever reason they would tell you now. They are doing that to people everyday, it's no skin off their nose!

My view is - good luck hope it goes your waay

 

[mattc]

Would the death of Frank McGarahan be a cause of these delays? As other have said maybe he was the "high up" authority that needed to sign off on the appoinment?

As for the "glitch" internally I smell a rat (being a cynical git). Stuff like that can be resolved immediately if there is the will to do so.

I would keep looking for employment opportunities elsewhere too.

Sorry if this sounds pessimistic

 

[neilrr]

I'd have to say if they are stalling on pulling the trigger it's because they are either unsure or don't really want you. Costs them SFA to keep you hanging around & they can still keep looking.

Sorry, hope I'm wrong. .

 

[st4]

Would the death of Frank McGarahan be a cause of these delays? As other have said maybe he was the "high up" authority that needed to sign off on the appoinment?

As for the "glitch" internally I smell a rat (being a cynical git). Stuff like that can be resolved immediately if there is the will to do so.

I would keep looking for employment opportunities elsewhere too.

Sorry if this sounds pessimistic

To be fair their HR person couldn't be nicer but when questioned about the particular issue its "nothing that harms your application, just processes that haven't been followed". No real specifics or facts, just HR speak.

My wife is an HR Director in a multinational company. Her view on this is that because of the current economic climate and resulting banking redundancies procedures in new recruiting have to be (and seen to be) followed to the letter. Ever i dotted and t crossed, so a delay like this can easily happen. They don't want to lay themselves open to claims from other staff who are on the way out.

She also feels that if they have decided they no longer wish to recruit you for whatever reason they would tell you now. They are doing that to people everyday, it's no skin off their nose!

My view is - good luck hope it goes your waay

I am in two mindsets that take in both these view points

1) If they no longer wished to recruit me they would just say so and wrap things up. Its nothing to them to keep me on the dangle unless they do want me.

2)However two weeks minimum to clear up a glitch. 2 weeks , a problem can be solved faster than that if there is a will. I see it like this. I was interviewed at lengh on 3 occasions, singled out as the best candidate (so they want me for the post). I want to work for them (fairly evident as I went to trouble of going to 3 interviews) so I don't see the issue. But as peterdon (and his wife who knows all about HR) it could be do to with the redundancies and the redeployment issues having to be addressed by the book.

I await eagerly and thank everyone for their help and support so far.

But then there is this which equally makes sense

I'd have to say if they are stalling on pulling the trigger it's because they are either unsure or don't really want you. Costs them SFA to keep you hanging around & they can still keep looking.

Sorry, hope I'm wrong. .

I hope you are too...

 

[Dieselman]

2)However two weeks minimum to clear up a glitch. 2 weeks , a problem can be solved faster than that if there is a will.

Not where there are redundancies of other staff taking place. They can't employ someone into the position until all internal staff being affected have been given the opportunity to apply for this position..assuming it still exists.

If no-one suitable internally wants the job then they are free to employ externally, but if a suitable candidate is found internally your position won't materialise.

You will have to wait this one out.

 

[st4]

Not where there are redundancies of other staff taking place. They can't employ someone into the position until all internal staff being affected have been given the opportunity to apply for this position..assuming it still exists.

If no-one suitable internally wants the job then they are free to employ externally, but if a suitable candidate is found internally your position won't materialise.

You will have to wait this one out.

Arrrhhh. A tense few weeks....expect my posts to even more hard hitting

 

[verytalldave]

My son first applied for a job as a security gaurd way back in the spring. He did the course and passed the 2 exams required and was granted his SIA card back in the beginning of August. He hasnt yet got an official start date but its very close. Certainly within the next week or two. Considering the money isnt all that, the number of hoops he has had to jump through is ridiculous.
So...............
It doesnt surprise me one bit to hear that some jobs can take months for somebody to make their minds up.
MANY years ago (nearly 20 actually) I applied for a job with Thames water as a control engineer. I was out of work at the time.
I was offered a job elsewhere and started. The application with Thames water was promply forgotten.
3 MONTHS LATER.............
I got a letter asking me to phone a number to arrange an interview.
So, out of courtesy, I phoned the number and spoke to a very pleasant lady whom I informed I was no longer on the market. She was most dissapointed as she told me I was one of the few applicants who had relevant experience and was one of only 2 or 3 who was up for it.
She said she would phone me back later to give me a chance to reconsider.
2 MONTHS LATER.....I got the phone call.......
She was surprised when I said that I hadnt changed my mind.
So you see, there are obviously swathes of plonkers out there who seem to think you can hang around for half a year waiting for them to come to some decision - or not.
No wonder this country is in the sh!t.