Recruitment flawed?

[Stigy]

Hi all,

What are your thoughts on recruitment, not solely on the Railway, but certainly largely on the railway? I've read so much recently of a push for female applicants in to certain industries, as well as the usual push for minority groups. It seems to me that 'positive discrimination' as I believe its known, used in most industries, and it seems unfair. It seems as a white, heterosexual male, I'm at a disadvantage before I even submit an application for a job.

Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate that we need a diverse workforce, but equally feel that a lot of the time (more so now than ever before) staff are being recruited not on merit, but on their specific profile. Again, I've got no issue with people being recruited of any background or sex over anybody else, as long as they meet the criteria for the job, however I've seen through experience that people are often recruited over others who probably shouldn't have been, or indeed wouldn't have been, had they been of a different ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.

Then there's the whole "It's not what you know..." state of affairs, which is another subject probably

 

[Shafina patel]

Well it's about time things change eh.

http://www.onrec.com/news/news-arch...-got-track-to-change-train-driver-recruitment

One of the careers which has struggled most to break free from the tradition of white middle-aged men is train-driving. Just 6% of train drivers in the UK are female, 5% are from ethnic minority backgrounds; only 10% are under 35.

The ASLEF union’s General Secretary Mick Whelan wrote to all Train Operating and Freight Operating Companies in October 2017, sharing the union’s concerns about how the lack of diversity within the driver grade had been slow to materialise, and was falling further behind other traditionally white-male dominated industries.
The stereotype of what makes a train driver - what was once many boy’s dream career - has been a very strong one. It took until 1979 for there to be the first female train driver in the UK. Trailblazer Karen Harrison, who went on to become an active union member and campaigner for women in the rail industry, didn’t think much of the culture of the time,

 

[Stigy]

Well it's about time things change eh.

I'm confused by what you mean, sorry.

Sometimes, the vast majority of applications are from white males. That's just how it goes. The Police Service is a prime example, namely the Met. There's a push for minority groups to apply, but they don't for whatever reason, hence the workforce they currently have. The issue we now have is that the Met are only accepting applicants if you meet their ethnicity criteria or speak more than one language (or it was this way until very recently at least). Because of this push, one application from somebody who meets their ethnicity criteria, trumps maybe ten applications from white males whom may be just as capable of performing the role of Police Officer.

 

[ComUtoR]

I'm confused by what you mean, sorry.

Sometimes, the vast majority of applications are from white males. That's just how it goes. The Police Service is a prime example, namely the Met. There's a push for minority groups to apply, but they don't for whatever reason,

A lot of misunderstanding there. There is no 'just how it goes' It was deliberate. They recruited white males over any other applicant. What else happens is that because they are seen as having institutionalized racism and very much being a tool of the white middle class, non whites do not apply. Same with it being an 'old boys club' Hence the lack of females.

hence the workforce they currently have. The issue we now have is that the Met are only accepting applicants if you meet their ethnicity criteria or speak more than one language (or it was this way until very recently at least). Because of this push, one application from somebody who meets their ethnicity criteria, trumps maybe ten applications from white males whom may be just as capable of performing the role of Police Officer.

Some argue that you need to positively discriminate so that the workforce becomes diverse or it will never happen.

 

[SPADTrap]

Train driving is a job where taking on applicants for any other reason other than being suitable for the role can have disastrous consequences.

 

[Stigy]

Train driving is a job where taking on applicants for any other reason other than being suitable for the role can have disastrous consequences.

I agree. But what if we are talking about the initial application stage? At the screening stage, it's easier to sift out those who wouldn't be suitable in the eyes of the recruiter, but some that may not be up to standard, then have a chance to take the assessments, which would dictate either way, once and for all if they have the right aptitude for the job.

 

[Stigy]

A lot of misunderstanding there. There is no 'just how it goes' It was deliberate. They recruited white males over any other applicant. What else happens is that because they are seen as having institutionalized racism and very much being a tool of the white middle class, non whites do not apply. Same with it being an 'old boys club' Hence the lack of females.



Some argue that you need to positively discriminate so that the workforce becomes diverse or it will never happen.

But by discriminating against white males now, it's arguably doing the same, just perfectly legally so it would appear. I see what you're saying, but people not applying from ethnicity groups because they're stuck in the dark ages and still feel the service is racist, unfortunately doesn't cut it. As for females, I don't think this is as much of an issue in the police these days, with countless female applicants and subsequent new recruits.

 

[Shafina patel]

A lot of misunderstanding there. There is no 'just how it goes' It was deliberate. They recruited white males over any other applicant. What else happens is that because they are seen as having institutionalized racism and very much being a tool of the white middle class, non whites do not apply. Same with it being an 'old boys club' Hence the lack of females.



Some argue that you need to positively discriminate so that the workforce becomes diverse or it will never happen.

Yes this is it. Also may I add, if there was a case of positive discrimination then by theory there would be an influx of ethnic minorities and females in the driving workforce but yet the workforce is still very much white. So I still don't see how a white male is underprivileged!!

 

[DarloRich]

I'm at a disadvantage before I even submit an application for a job.

no you are not.

 

[Stigy]

I feel I should add, as far as the railway goes, I'm not speaking solely about train drivers. The industry as a whole is massive as you all know. Driving is just one part of it. We have a diverse workforce already and I have worked in the industry for 12-years, therefore I don't merely have an axe to grind. This thread was made due to observations I've made over the last couple of years mainly.

 

[ComUtoR]

But by discriminating against white males now, it's arguably doing the same, just perfectly legally so it would appear.

It is still illegal. The equal opportunity legislation provides opportunity where it previously wasn't.

I see what you're saying, but people not applying from ethnicity groups because they're stuck in the dark ages and still feel the service is racist, unfortunately doesn't cut it.

The Police are still perceived to be a bunch of racist, bigoted, sexist thugs. THAT is the reason why people do not apply. By having a policy and with recruitment being heavily recruited from minorities they hope to break that stereotype. That cannot do that by continuing to employ and recruit from the white middle class. By having the mentality that it is the fault of the applicant for not wanting to join a racist institution continues to promote that stereotype.

As for females, I don't think this is as much of an issue in the police these days, with countless female applicants and subsequent new recruits.

Holy **** ! The issue runs very deep WITHIN the police force and other institutions. You can't see the news without hearing about the Gender pay gap and the problems Women face in the workforce. They are given lesser roles and paid less for it. They are still pushed out and discriminated against when it comes to promotion and still face an uphill struggle for equality.
Women in the workforce has been driven by these equal opportunities laws and positive discrimination recruitment drives. We wouldn't be where we are today without them. Now we are moving into an era where the pay gap is being addressed and equality within the workforce and not just recruitment.

Same with 'protected characteristics' It is because this law exists that people at the least feel they can apply.

 

[Stigy]

It is still illegal. The equal opportunity legislation provides opportunity where it previously wasn't.



The Police are still perceived to be a bunch of racist, bigoted, sexist thugs. THAT is the reason why people do not apply. By having a policy and with recruitment being heavily recruited from minorities they hope to break that stereotype. That cannot do that by continuing to employ and recruit from the white middle class. By having the mentality that it is the fault of the applicant for not wanting to join a racist institution continues to promote that stereotype.



Holy **** ! The issue runs very deep WITHIN the police force and other institutions. You can't see the news without hearing about the Gender pay gap and the problems Women face in the workforce. They are given lesser roles and paid less for it. They are still pushed out and discriminated against when it comes to promotion and still face an uphill struggle for equality.
Women in the workforce has been driven by these equal opportunities laws and positive discrimination recruitment drives. We wouldn't be where we are today without them. Now we are moving into an era where the pay gap is being addressed and equality within the workforce and not just recruitment.

Same with 'protected characteristics' It is because this law exists that people at the least feel they can apply.

So to summarise then, white heterosexual males are at a natural disadvantage?

 

[ComUtoR]

So to summarise then, white heterosexual males are at a natural disadvantage?

Where in any post have I stated that or implied that is the case ?

The system is broken and until people can be considered equal and treated as such; then there will always need to be some form of mechanic to impose a system of equality.

The Driver recruitment has a huge element of equality as it is mostly based on passing an assessment and further down the line you must pass more assessments and it is to the same standard for everyone. There is still a part of the process where people are reticent to apply because it may appear to be a white male dominated industry but in all honesty I haven't seen that. However, that may be the case because of positive discrimination and more and more 'minorities' are seen as Drivers.

There is still heavy institutionalized racism. The Management grades and Directors etc is still very white and very male. There is still a case where some people are just full of hate and I have heard some nasty comments towards both women and people of colour. There is still an old boys club running rampant and nepotism is rife. I don't know any 'black' Driver Managers at my TOC and I only know of 2 Female Driver Managers (one has recently retired I think) and and the rumors of how she got her job just supports the stereotypes.

 

[Tom Quinne]

Why can’t people just admit they might not be good enough, that’s why you isn’t get ABC job not because of any discrimination?

That goes for every, not just white males.

 

[Stigy]

Why can’t people just admit they might not be good enough, that’s why you isn’t get ABC job not because of any discrimination?

That goes for every, not just white males.

I agree to an extent, but it works both ways. People play the race card too often.

 

[Stigy]

Where in any post have I stated that or implied that is the case ?

You haven't....It was a tongue in cheek comment because we appear to be going round in circles and I really don't think this thread has been taken as I intended it when I wrote it. I honestly don't expect everybody to be of the same view as me, maybe I'm just an old skeptic. I do however think people need to think outside the box and look at the bigger picture sometimes. If I was a recruiting manager for a company in London, say, Tooting as an example and I said in my campaign we are actively seeking white males and females to reflect a diverse workforce as they are under represented, would that be acceptable?

 

[Bellbell]

So to summarise then, white heterosexual males are at a natural disadvantage?

No. You are still at a natural advantage. You are what people expect to see when they think police officer or train driver. No one is wondering about your plans for having children while they're interviewing you, to give you one example.

Where in any post have I stated that or implied that is the case ?

The system is broken and until people can be considered equal and treated as such; then there will always need to be some form of mechanic to impose a system of equality.

The Driver recruitment has a huge element of equality as it is mostly based on passing an assessment and further down the line you must pass more assessments and it is to the same standard for everyone. There is still a part of the process where people are reticent to apply because it may appear to be a white male dominated industry but in all honesty I haven't seen that. However, that may be the case because of positive discrimination and more and more 'minorities' are seen as Drivers.

There is still heavy institutionalized racism. The Management grades and Directors etc is still very white and very male. There is still a case where some people are just full of hate and I have heard some nasty comments towards both women and people of colour. There is still an old boys club running rampant and nepotism is rife. I don't know any 'black' Driver Managers at my TOC and I only know of 2 Female Driver Managers (one has recently retired I think) and and the rumors of how she got her job just supports the stereotypes.

Most women I know in desirable posts in heavily male dominated industries have had sly comments made about how they acquired those jobs. Even with train driver roles, although the assessments are objective, the DMI is less so. I've heard people talk about women drivers at my TOC and even if they agree they passed the assessments fair and square there are still some who will cast aspersions on whether a bloke would have passed the DMI with the same interview score etc. Thankfully, they are in the minority. I've been really heartened by the majority of the comments on this thread, too.

 

[Kingo]

I was in the fire service before recently becoming a driver and took part in promoting a recruitment campaign.

We pushed the job as a whole and application information at as many ‘under represented’ people as we could (which isn’t positive discrimination). Largely as research told us they weren’t aware of recruitment or didn’t feasibly consider it as a career option.
We visited temples, mosques, mums and tots groups, supermarkets, community groups etc etc and we found similar outcomes.

1. Shift work was unappealing (And the idea of working weekends and nights to some was completely alien)
2. Childcare was a massive issue
3. The job itself was unappealing (and culturally frowned upon in some cases)
4. The money wasn’t enough
5. It didn’t allow for some cultural practices (prayer times, beards, religious holidays etc)

Despite enlighting people on some of the work arounds of some of the issues - the effort that went into it was completely disproportionate to the amount of applications received from those targeted - with little to no effect on the final outcome of the recruitment.

People seem to think it’s about getting underrepresented groups into the job - whereas actually getting them to apply in the first case is a real challenge - and the railway still works on the adage of “If we open it - they will come”.

 

[Bromley boy]

Hi all,

What are your thoughts on recruitment, not solely on the Railway, but certainly largely on the railway? I've read so much recently of a push for female applicants in to certain industries, as well as the usual push for minority groups. It seems to me that 'positive discrimination' as I believe its known, used in most industries, and it seems unfair. It seems as a white, heterosexual male, I'm at a disadvantage before I even submit an application for a job.

Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate that we need a diverse workforce, but equally feel that a lot of the time (more so now than ever before) staff are being recruited not on merit, but on their specific profile. Again, I've got no issue with people being recruited of any background or sex over anybody else, as long as they meet the criteria for the job, however I've seen through experience that people are often recruited over others who probably shouldn't have been, or indeed wouldn't have been, had they been of a different ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.

Then there's the whole "It's not what you know..." state of affairs, which is another subject probably

When it comes to ethnic minority / female recruitment there is a drive to increase diversity in many industries, but that definitely isn’t the same thing as positive discrimination (which would be direct discrimination on the grounds of race/sex, and is illegal under the Equality Act).

Certainly at my TOC the younger drivers now (quite rightly) include a fairly diverse mix of ethnicities, but I wouldn’t say that I felt in any way disadvantaged as a white male during the recruitment process and indeed the majority of trainees are still white males.

When it comes to gender I think a bigger issue is the fact that there simply aren’t, and probably never will be, many women for whom driving trains appeals as a career choice. Not an issue in itself, so long as those who do apply are treated fairly.

 

[GNDriver]

Train driving is a job where taking on applicants for any other reason other than being suitable for the role can have disastrous consequences.

This ^^^^

HOWEVER, and I speak from past experience here and I know a lot of other drivers who also have the same past experience in the same field as I do have witnessed the same....


One of the scariest things I have seen happen recently in our fire services are people being selected for firefighting training and it’s 100% to meet a criteria and not because they are fit for the job. I won’t say whether it was a race , gender or even sexual preference thing... but these people could NOT do the job. And I mean could not. Some were even scared of heights!!! And knew this before applying. I have even had someone point blank refuse to enter a house fire because they are scared. THIS IS SCARY STUFF. It’s not like in an office where they end up printing out the wrong stuff... humans can die as a result of this. And I think it’s a big hidden problem we have at the minute. And it’s growing! I hope it doesn’t reach the Railway I really do. Luckily, a lot of the people I have seen like this end up being miraculously promoted to a higher role that’s not operational. It’s not right still... but at least it means people might not die unnecessarily. Sad times

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Despite enlighting people on some of the work arounds of some of the issues - the effort that went into it was completely disproportionate to the amount of applications received from those targeted - with little to no effect on the final outcome of the recruitment.

People seem to think it’s about getting underrepresented groups into the job - whereas actually getting them to apply in the first case is a real challenge - and the railway still works on the adage of “If we open it - they will come”.

A railway manager of my acquaintance once made exactly this point. They were asked why a particular ethnic group was under represented at a location where they live in sufficient numbers to be a clearly visible part of the community. The answer was that despite numerous efforts at "outreach" those people were simply not applying. Going forward the challenge is not only to eliminate casual discrimination (like so-called banter) in the workplace but also to demonstrate that such elimination has been achieved.

 

[Stigy]

This ^^^^

HOWEVER, and I speak from past experience here and I know a lot of other drivers who also have the same past experience in the same field as I do have witnessed the same....


One of the scariest things I have seen happen recently in our fire services are people being selected for firefighting training and it’s 100% to meet a criteria and not because they are fit for the job. I won’t say whether it was a race , gender or even sexual preference thing... but these people could NOT do the job. And I mean could not. Some were even scared of heights!!! And knew this before applying. I have even had someone point blank refuse to enter a house fire because they are scared. THIS IS SCARY STUFF. It’s not like in an office where they end up printing out the wrong stuff... humans can die as a result of this. And I think it’s a big hidden problem we have at the minute. And it’s growing! I hope it doesn’t reach the Railway I really do. Luckily, a lot of the people I have seen like this end up being miraculously promoted to a higher role that’s not operational. It’s not right still... but at least it means people might not die unnecessarily. Sad times

And this, is exactly what I was referring to. There was a case going back a few years about a female police officer recruited similarly. I think it's hidden in all industries in the modern age, even the railway, although the testing for train drivers is of course intense, there's not just driving jobs on the railway.

 

[tiptoptaff]

And this, is exactly what I was referring to. There was a case going back a few years about a female police officer recruited similarly. I think it's hidden in all industries in the modern age, even the railway, although the testing for train drivers is of course intense, there's not just driving jobs on the railway.

I have never had anyone refuse a to do something I have instructed them to because they weren't capable of doing it. If they are not good enough they will not make the training stage, and if they do, and they aren't good enough, they will not be passed out to work trains. There are strict and set standards to meet during recruitment and training. All of it is audited at my TOC. The assessors will pass a trainee out on a route. Then their DSM and Regional Manager will both independently assess and interview said trainee to ensure they have been passed fairly and correctly.

This applies to males, females, ethnic minorities, white Caucasians, gay, straight, in between, any variation of a a "group" of people you could think of. The standard everyone has to meet is the same. They either meet it, or they don't. If they do, they pass, if they don't, they fail.

I resource over 600 train crew. I could name every single female or ethnic minority driver. Trust me, white males are not being discriminated against or becoming a minority by any stretch.

 

[43185]

From what I've experienced, & it's only my experiences, over the last 6 years or so the recruiting process at what's now GWR is a joke & possibly flawed. I say this because I've done over 70 applications with them over that time & most of them have been for revenue, ticket examiner & gate line along with a few for on board staff. From what I know, on several occasions, the job's been offered to someone who at the last minute doesn't like the shifts or whatever & the job gets re-advertised. Because you got overlooked at that assessment day you can't apply for that position for 6 months even though you were probably sat next to the person who didn't suddenly want it !! Now may be a good time to mention that I did nearly 10yrs as a revenue inspector based at Milton Keynes with initially Silverlink then the rubbish that was London Midland.
GWR sometimes take away your on line application if you apply for more than one position but don't ask you if you have any preferences ?
They hold assessment days which, from my own experiences, are always recruiting females who at that time are working for the likes of Tesco or Asda & are in their 20's ! They don't like anyone around the 50 mark & experience frightens them as you already know to much & presumably you may question something from your own experiences on the railway especially where unions are concerned.
There's nothing wrong with females on the railway & god knows there's a few of them that would scare the c**p out of any bloke if they were confronted in any way & that inc's my mrs !! GWR's recruitment for the last say 5yrs has been heavily female orientated except for maybe drivers & TM's although rightly so there are a lot of female TM's.
Now I know a lot of you may say you obviously weren't good enough but to be fair if that was the case I'd hold my hands up & stop wasting GWR's time, the railway is based upon lots of rules & safety yet 10yrs experience counts for nothing with them & they've even said it's not important !!
So why can I stand near the barriers at Temple Meads, even now, when waiting for my mrs & suss out straight away who's going to double shuffle the barriers & who doesn't actually have a ticket before they get asked to pay & then come out with a story from a false starting point yet all the time the gate-line staff are talking to each other, eating, playing on a phone or looking elsewhere ? Yet experience counts for nothing, baffles me ?

 

[tiptoptaff]

From what I've experienced, & it's only my experiences, over the last 6 years or so the recruiting process at what's now GWR is a joke & possibly flawed. I say this because I've done over 70 applications with them over that time & most of them have been for revenue, ticket examiner & gate line along with a few for on board staff. From what I know, on several occasions, the job's been offered to someone who at the last minute doesn't like the shifts or whatever & the job gets re-advertised. Because you got overlooked at that assessment day you can't apply for that position for 6 months even though you were probably sat next to the person who didn't suddenly want it !! Now may be a good time to mention that I did nearly 10yrs as a revenue inspector based at Milton Keynes with initially Silverlink then the rubbish that was London Midland.
GWR sometimes take away your on line application if you apply for more than one position but don't ask you if you have any preferences ?
They hold assessment days which, from my own experiences, are always recruiting females who at that time are working for the likes of Tesco or Asda & are in their 20's ! They don't like anyone around the 50 mark & experience frightens them as you already know to much & presumably you may question something from your own experiences on the railway especially where unions are concerned.
There's nothing wrong with females on the railway & god knows there's a few of them that would scare the c**p out of any bloke if they were confronted in any way & that inc's my mrs !! GWR's recruitment for the last say 5yrs has been heavily female orientated except for maybe drivers & TM's although rightly so there are a lot of female TM's.
Now I know a lot of you may say you obviously weren't good enough but to be fair if that was the case I'd hold my hands up & stop wasting GWR's time, the railway is based upon lots of rules & safety yet 10yrs experience counts for nothing with them & they've even said it's not important !!
So why can I stand near the barriers at Temple Meads, even now, when waiting for my mrs & suss out straight away who's going to double shuffle the barriers & who doesn't actually have a ticket before they get asked to pay & then come out with a story from a false starting point yet all the time the gate-line staff are talking to each other, eating, playing on a phone or looking elsewhere ? Yet experience counts for nothing, baffles me ?

Hello, my post was about GWR - you encapsulate perfectly bitterness at not getting a job. You weren't good enough. It is NOT female oriented in any way. How do you know why they were re advertised? There are mnay numbers of reasons people cannot take a job for whatever reason.

Get over yourself. Recruitment is not flawed. We have people capable of doing the jobs they were hired to do. In my opinion, that is quite the opposite of flawed recruitment.

 

[43185]

Because I spoke to First at Aberdeen regarding the re advertising that's how ?
Shame non of the ones capable of doing the jobs actually work on the Temple Meads gate-line especially on a Saturday night.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Because I spoke to First at Aberdeen regarding the re advertising that's how ?
Shame non of the ones capable of doing the jobs actually work on the Temple Meads gate-line especially on a Saturday night.

First at Aberdeen will have little knowledge of what GWR actually do in terms of day to day recruitment.

It's here I would normally invite you to apply if you think you can do a better job, but seeing as you have and have failed several times, I don't see the point. Many gateline staff move to better jobs. So they must do something right some of the time

 

[Dave1987]

Hi all,

What are your thoughts on recruitment, not solely on the Railway, but certainly largely on the railway? I've read so much recently of a push for female applicants in to certain industries, as well as the usual push for minority groups. It seems to me that 'positive discrimination' as I believe its known, used in most industries, and it seems unfair. It seems as a white, heterosexual male, I'm at a disadvantage before I even submit an application for a job.

Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate that we need a diverse workforce, but equally feel that a lot of the time (more so now than ever before) staff are being recruited not on merit, but on their specific profile. Again, I've got no issue with people being recruited of any background or sex over anybody else, as long as they meet the criteria for the job, however I've seen through experience that people are often recruited over others who probably shouldn't have been, or indeed wouldn't have been, had they been of a different ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.

Then there's the whole "It's not what you know..." state of affairs, which is another subject probably

I actually agree with this. In the modern world being male is probably the worst thing you can be to help your career prospects. The amount of positive discrimination that is going on now is palpable. Equality is exactly that, not prioritising one sex over the other...

 

[Barry K]

Surely with modern computer systems, it would be acceptable and entirely possible for the sifters to see only "Candidate 2864", and block out name/age/ethnicity/gender/sexuality (Why sexuality matters is beyond me), and just read the pertinent information re qualifications, history and job experience. That would make the job entirely on merit.
I would, under their rules, be technically classed as disabled, if I wished to pursue that route. But I don't, because it is a disability I have lived with my entire life, and do not wish to be defined by. If I were to get the job, I would want to get it because I am Good Enough, not because I happen to tick a box....

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Surely with modern computer systems, it would be acceptable and entirely possible for the sifters to see only "Candidate 2864", and block out name/age/ethnicity/gender/sexuality (Why sexuality matters is beyond me), and just read the pertinent information re qualifications, history and job experience. That would make the job entirely on merit.
I would, under their rules, be technically classed as disabled, if I wished to pursue that route. But I don't, because it is a disability I have lived with my entire life, and do not wish to be defined by. If I were to get the job, I would want to get it because I am Good Enough, not because I happen to tick a box....

AFAIAA that is exactly how applications are dealt with. During the various sifts those doing the selection based solely on the initial application do so without any reference to the candidate's personal details. It's also why generic questions about, for example, working as part of a team or giving good customer service are so commonly asked: it allows selection to be made based on the appropriate qualities needed for the job without any concern for the candidate's identity. The one negative factor which probably does exist is the sheer volume of applications being dealt with may mean some companies are using machine-reading as part of the sift: include the right keywords in your application and you're through, otherwise tough. I suspect this is at the route of some people's frustration about the process and its outcomes. And trying to keep the numbers of applicants down is also a reason for "blocking" repeat applications however unfair that may be.