RailUK Forums
RailUK Forums > UK Railway Forums > Railway Jobs & Careers


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 14th January 2017, 23:47   #61
Llanigraham
An Ex - Bobby!!
Established Member
 
Join Date: 23 Mar 2013
Location: Powys
Posts: 2,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyN View Post
Red2005, fair enough mate, has I have already said I maybe went a bit far in the beginning and have definetly give people the wrong impression of me in some ways on here. Yes I am old school and say whats on my mind, good or bad but I am also a hard worker and am good at what job I may be doing and am very friendly and easy to get on with unless anyone makes me otherwise.

But of your character reference of course I am money motivated, aernt you. Would you go to work for nothing because I wouldn't. I have tried very hard to get back in this Industry, I never expected a free ride. That's why I did a stint In Leeds for 2 Months doing a TPO Job via a agency, paying my own way up there and passed my PTS to get it on my CV. I also did several related courses so never expected a free ride so obviously I was a little disappointed that I failed just because I never passed a test that had no relevance to the job I applied for. The only thing I'm guilty of is airing my frustration on a forum I admit. I never meant to offend anyone I can assure you
If the employer thinks it does have a relevance then it does.
End of!
It is YOU that have to fit into THEIR criteria, not the other way around.
Get used to it.
Llanigraham is offline   Reply With Quote
Registered users do not see these banners - join today!
Old 15th January 2017, 11:01   #62
falcon
Member
 
Join Date: 8 Mar 2009
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyN View Post
I shall be coming off this forum has the Railway isn't the Railway I used to remember back in the BR Days. Now the dust has settled I think I am quite happy being a 9 to 5er Monday to Friday, and going bed at night and having the weekends to myself.

Just applied for a Train Presentation Operative job again (Cleaner) and sorry the aggravation in just a cleaning job with Northern Rail beggars belief and in hindsight I don't think its worth the aggro. Online tests, applications explaining giving examples of when you made a difference, gave customer service etc etc. What the hell has all this got to do in the slightest with clearing rubbish from a train ??? It seems funny that when I have applied for these types of jobs outside of the railway for extra cash I seem to walk into them without any fuss and why wouldn't I, Ive done the jobs before and to me that's all that is necessary for these roles. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to do them. Northern Rail will be wanting "A" Levels and a Degree next for this "Non Skilled" job.

Seriously I wish everyone on here all the luck in the world in getting on the Rail Industry but to me I no longer see the fascination, just a lot of grief. I used to be gutted when I got turned down for these jobs but think I am now at the stage when I'm happy at home watching the Sport on a Saturday night with a drop of booze and feel sorry for the lads continually working nights at weekend. Some boast of the money there making but can't take it with you when gone and now I'm a 9 to 5er I feel better in myself and healthier. Don't know why I reapplied to be honest, maybe to prove a point at how ridiculous Northern Rail are and there criteria to be a Train Cleaner. Good luck all, I'll enjoy my weekends off.
I could not agree more. It is completely out of hand now with all this "give me an example when you have". It's called the S.T.A.R system of interviewing and all the crap HR departments are using it now because they know no better.
falcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2017, 11:10   #63
ComUtoR
Established Member
 
Join Date: 13 Dec 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon View Post
I could not agree more. It is completely out of hand now with all this "give me an example when you have". It's called the S.T.A.R system of interviewing and all the crap HR departments are using it now because they know no better.
What would you suggest is a better way ?

We could go back to the old school way of interviewing. That would be awesome. Nepotism, racism, sexism, deals under the table, face fit culture, jobs for the boys, blagged answers and only getting the job because some random person said yes, based purely because they wanted to.

I don't specifically agree with STAR etc but interviews and applications that require set criteria has allowed anyone to join a company without fear of prejudice of discrimination. Pass the test, meet the criteria, everyone gets the same questions.
__________________
First rule of DOO.... DONT TALK ABOUT DOO
The Future's bright, the future's Ora...
ComUtoR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2017, 12:12   #64
MichaelAMW
Member
 
Join Date: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComUtoR View Post
What would you suggest is a better way ?

We could go back to the old school way of interviewing. That would be awesome. Nepotism, racism, sexism, deals under the table, face fit culture, jobs for the boys, blagged answers and only getting the job because some random person said yes, based purely because they wanted to.

I don't specifically agree with STAR etc but interviews and applications that require set criteria has allowed anyone to join a company without fear of prejudice of discrimination. Pass the test, meet the criteria, everyone gets the same questions.
Well... That is a somewhat extreme view in the other direction, but I suspect just a bit of hyperbole. A better way is one which not only retains the benefits of the STAR lark but also is a little more sympathetic to recruiting on the basis of potential. Ideally, you do this by using STAR for some basic transferable skills with a view to developing those for the specific requirements of the particular job, but it often seems to me that STAR is used as a way of only selecting people who have more or less already done the job before. The risk is, say, that a person who needs a bit of training but would be a pleasure to have on the team is sifted out in favour of someone with previous direct similar experience but a poor work ethic. The civil service tries to do this with the idea of core competencies for particular grades or specialisations.
MichaelAMW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2017, 12:32   #65
ComUtoR
Established Member
 
Join Date: 13 Dec 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelAMW View Post
Well... That is a somewhat extreme view in the other direction, but I suspect just a bit of hyperbole.
Not really hyperbole. Discrimination 'back in the day' was rife and to be honest, there is still plenty of discrimination that takes place.

I found the whole process to Driver a bit weird but ultimately it was fair because EVERYONE was going through the process. It didn't matter the colour of your skin or gender EVERYONE went through the same process.

I also recently sat and internal interview and this was under this much maligned STAR approach but I was confident that all the candidates were asked the same questions. A few years ago it was very much the case of jobs for the boys. If you were part of the club you got the job. STAR and criteria based interviews remove all of that. There is still wiggle room but its generally quite fair.

There is risk in all cases and I don't think that could be avoided without a pure test based method like, you know, a maths test....

What you describe is pretty much the exact experience of how we interview. There is a mix of set criteria, STAR and experience based criteria, and then you still have the wiggle room for candidates passing the various 'attitude tests'

Should a cleaning job have these requirements ? Why not. They are no less than any other employee and should also aim for good quality candidates who may have potential for promotion and transferable skills. One of my jobs in a previous life was cleaning. (great job) I went through a whole day of assessments. It transpired that some of their previous candidates got the job the 'old school' way and turned out they were idiots and a complete liability.

Some of our Train Cleaners operate heavy pumping material. Deal with hazardous chemicals, mix up caustic solutions and drive about industrial vehicles etc.

Basic maths and English seem like common sense.
__________________
First rule of DOO.... DONT TALK ABOUT DOO
The Future's bright, the future's Ora...

Last edited by ComUtoR; 15th January 2017 at 13:10.
ComUtoR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2017, 13:02   #66
Dave333
Member
 
Join Date: 26 Aug 2014
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon View Post
I could not agree more. It is completely out of hand now with all this "give me an example when you have". It's called the S.T.A.R system of interviewing and all the crap HR departments are using it now because they know no better.

It's not out of hand, it's about weeding out the deadwood, if you can't be bothered with a simple example the railway isn't for you.
Dave333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 16:30   #67
falcon
Member
 
Join Date: 8 Mar 2009
Posts: 104
Default

It's crazey to ask someone who is going for a cleaning job to ask "give me an example of when you have given excellent customer service". "when have you had to deal with a stressful situation" and more questions like that all that have nothing to do with the job applied for.

The reason for the ridiculas questions that are completelty unrelated to the job is to select people on the bases of subservience (willingness to obey others unquestioningly) and a desire to avoid people with experiance.

Here is an example that was asked by a TOC.

A railway company advertised for 6 train drivers externally and internally (why externally when there are already over 100 guards that are trained over the route and have the knowledge already and a proven track record of being able to carry out safty critical duties).

At the drivers interview both internal and external applicants where asked the following question.

" You are a train driver travelling passenger to London to pick up a working out of London"

"The catering manager comes to you and ask's can you come into the kitchen and wash up some pots because we are really busy"

"What would your response be?"

Now that seems quite a fair question does it not?

But it isn't, because all the internall applicants (mostly guards) know that you don't wash pot's up because you can cut yourself and scaled your self, put glasses in a sink then someone puts plates on top and the glasses break leaving shards of glass in the sink, put a sharp knife into a sink which cannot be seen under the water causing injury to anyone reaching into the sink. then when you have cut or scalded yourself another driver has to be found to work the train out of London (this is called experience gained by doing the job and knowning what you should do and not do).

And we all know what the externall applicants that have no experience and very little knowledge about the railway, other than the 50k + a year drivers sallary are going to say.

"of course I would get out of my seat and help wash up the pot's,stick a broom up my arse as well if you want" (keeping the overtime rate on 50k+ year in mind)

And the correct answer straight from the mouth of the HR manager "yes I would get up and wash the pot's"

Ladies and Gentleman we regret to announce that the 18.00 service from London has been delayed due to no driver (he is getting the stitches put in at the Hospital).The reality being the train is delayed due to some utter idiot in HR.
That is just one example of how HR have a determined policy of promotion based on subservience.

If the S.T.A.R system where being used properly the question to the cleaner who started this thread (and I suggest you go back and read it before posting) would be " can you give my an example of how you have cleaned a particularly dirty location and if you have not already done so discribe to me how you would do so in the future" That is a fair and sensible question.

"Give me an example of when you have given excellent customer sirvece" What rubbish!

I have spelt some things wrong in this post so those who realise they are loosing the argument can pick up on them.
falcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 17:39   #68
ComUtoR
Established Member
 
Join Date: 13 Dec 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 2,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon View Post
Here is an example that was asked by a TOC.

A railway company advertised for 6 train drivers externally and internally (why externally when there are already over 100 guards that are trained over the route and have the knowledge already and a proven track record of being able to carry out safty critical duties).
Why externally. That's obvious and if you fail to see that, then I can understand why you fail to see the rest.

If you have a pool of 100 Guards (who don't know the route or have the knowledge btw) you have a very limited pool. If you advertise externally you potentially have thousands of applicants.

Why is it limited ? Well lets start at the basics. Those 100+ Guards are already employees and a % of them are happy in their roles so do not want a new one. Then you have those without a proven track record. Then you have those who are near leaving for any reason (retirement etc) Then you have a question of those who will fail to make the grade. With a huge failure rate for the assessment you lose even more. That's not even the last of it. You still have to replace those who are successful and in the interim you are then short staff members. Chuck in the additional costs of internals vs externals and you can understand why recruitment is advertised externally.

Quote:
(...)

That is just one example of how HR have a determined policy of promotion based on subservience.

I think your confusing subservience with good employees. Should a company employ someone who would say "No, **** it, I'm booked pass so I do what I want" ? But then again we can both use extreme examples to highlight a point.

Quote:
If the S.T.A.R system where being used properly the question to the cleaner who started this thread (and I suggest you go back and read it before posting) would be " can you give my an example of how you have cleaned a particularly dirty location and if you have not already done so discribe to me how you would do so in the future" That is a fair and sensible question.
I would agree. Are you now suggesting we keep the STAR system but simply change the questions ?

Quote:
"Give me an example of when you have given excellent customer sirvece" What rubbish!
I can see a big reason why that question is asked. It's a shame that you clearly can't. The point remains that the company who sets the questions believes that they are relevant to the job or relevant to getting a decent employee. Neither you or I have a say in that (although I might...) ALL candidates go through this process. Those that fail; I can see why.
__________________
First rule of DOO.... DONT TALK ABOUT DOO
The Future's bright, the future's Ora...
ComUtoR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:38.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8
© RailUK Forums 2005 - 2017