Should Talent Pools be abolished?

[Sorcerer]

I thought about this last night after reading through some of the posts in the thread about talent pool duration, and it had me thinking. I understand that talent pools are designed to benefit the TOCs and not the candidates because it gives them a whole pool of vetted candidates who have passed the necessary psychometrics and can call them in at a moment's notice when a vacancy is available. The problem though is that sometimes this isn't the case and TOCs will instead just start a fresh recruitment campaign for a vacancy, and thus people waiting in the pool for a job offer will build up over time. TOCs recruitment teams are apparently very small, and apparently talent banks can create a pool of up to hundreds if not thousands which is simply unsustainable for a small team.

Considering that people can wait in talent pools for years before receiving a job offer and that their time period in the pool can expire, it would be a waste of money vetting candidates who don't end up making it there or leaving for another TOC, and given they might once again recruit for new candidates even with active talent pools, I genuinely do not see a good reason to keep them. They sound like more trouble than they are worth for both TOC and candidate, and I think if companies need staff they should just recruit when they actually need them instead of what can be a potentially unsustainable business model that will end up practically stringing along many hopeful railway workers who will face increasing frustration years down the line when they still aren't getting job offers.

However I must admit that I am not confidently knowledgeable on the subject and am open to having my views changed with strong enough arguments, but I think it's also a worthy discussion by itself since many here on the forums will have different experiences with talent pools and TOC recruitment, so I'd most definitely like to see everyone's thoughts on the matter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't see an issue with them, but if they're being bypassed that's dishonest.

 

[Horizon22]

No, but they need restructuring.

• Ensure they are not too big to be unsustainable
• After X amount of time, people should be told their application is no longer valid. This should also be stated upon offer.
• Every Y months, individuals should be updated on the current status even if it’s “no change”.
• Before an advert goes out, a check to be made for the relevant talent pool if one exists.
• Recruitment teams need to be increased to handle talent pools effectively.

They are in principle a very effective method to quickly hire candidates who have passed the relevant criteria.

However they are mismanaged due to a variety of factors - I’ve seen even small talent pools almost forgotten about and I’ve no doubt TOCs run new adverts for roles they’ve already got a number of people in a pool for.

 

[anglian96]

From a employee perspective they are horrible things but from a employers perspective its the best way to recruit and it's a no brainer for them

 

[ComUtoR]

Would it be better to simply say 'no' to a candidate and then bar them from ever applying again ?

The alternative might cause more issues too. If all applicants were reset each campaign, then you would probably find that you switch the problem to having more applications to sift each time. Imagine your chances in a sift where potentially hundreds of applicants are far more qualified than you because they have previous passes.
My feeling is that talent pools are a necessary evil. They serve a purpose for both candidate and employer. As a candidate it's better to be in the pool than in the changing room, still trying on your costume.

 

[12LDA28C]

and apparently talent banks can create a pool of up to hundreds if not thousands which is simply unsustainable for a small team.

Where did you get this information from? Given the fact that a majority of candidates who get sent for psychometric testing fail, I find it very hard to believe that anything like 'hundreds if not thousands' of people would end up in the talent pool of a particular TOC.

 

[Aviator88]

Where did you get this information from? Given the fact that a majority of candidates who get sent for psychometric testing fail, I find it very hard to believe that anything like 'hundreds if not thousands' of people would end up in the talent pool of a particular TOC.

I recall seeing a post on here, fairly recently, claiming that the talent pool for their particular TOC contained in excess of three thousand candidates. I have to admit struggling to believe that number, but there we go.

 

[Sly Sloth]

Certain talent pools exist to…….
Ensure a decent gender spread through courses (it happens)
Keep internal candidates motivated by dangling a carrot
save on recruitment costs
Ensure that courses can be filled as and when the toc see fit

Lots of adverts now state the need to have gcse passes in maths and English for the apprenticeship element of railway jobs to save the toc from paying an external agency to get a candidate to pass the equivalent gcse test. The kickback from these apprenticeships is around £15K

 

[Sorcerer]

That's pretty much where I heard it from, and apparently GWR are particularly bad with their talent pool. Admittedly thousands might be a too much because even with a five year pass on assessments you would need hundreds of applicants in a pool at a time for a single role, but I can believe talent tools can reach the hundreds number. I now think a restructuring might be necessary rather than straight up abolishment because if TOCs find it beneficial to start new recruitment campaigns even with people in talent pools for the same vacancy then something has definitely gone wrong.

 

[ComUtoR]

I received the following email today, which seems to be confusingly written. Not sure exactly what they’re saying!

“Good afternoon,

I hope you are well.

Firstly, I would like to thank you for your patience following your application for the role of Trainee Train Driver at Southeastern Trains. We appreciate your tolerance and thank you for your continued interest. Our Driver recruitment campaign has proven to be incredibly popular with over 8000 applicants for a limited number of training places, so, congratulations on passing the selection to remain in our train driver talent pool. (...)

Which is why talent pools are pretty huge.

 

[12LDA28C]

I recall seeing a post on here, fairly recently, claiming that the talent pool for their particular TOC contained in excess of three thousand candidates. I have to admit struggling to believe that number, but there we go.

This seems to me to be beyond unlikely. Assuming the 'talent pool' comprises people who have successfully passed all the various stages of the recruitment process, including the psychometric testing and are 'ready to go' when a vacancy becomes available, that suggests an investment of well over a million pounds in OPC testing alone.

Which is why talent pools are pretty huge.

Not really. 8000 applicants does not equal 8000 people in the talent pool, or indeed anywhere near that figure. The sifting process would no doubt get rid of well over half and then of the 'best' candidates sent to OPC, the majority of them would fail the testing.

 

[Urban Gateline]

I voted no, they definitely serve their purpose, as annoying as they are for candidates, if used properly they can provide readily available candidates who have passed assessments already so as to speed up the recruitment process once vacancies arise. I agree with @Bletchleyite though that it's very bad if they are being bypassed!

 

[Shinigami]

I recall seeing a post on here, fairly recently, claiming that the talent pool for their particular TOC contained in excess of three thousand candidates. I have to admit struggling to believe that number, but there we go.

Yeah I saw that as well. I don’t believe a word of it. Sure many people apply for it but I cannot imagine THAT many people passing all the stages, all of them passing the DMI and them still recruiting more and ALL for the same TOC? I am completely certain that’s absolute nonsense

This seems to me to be beyond unlikely. Assuming the 'talent pool' comprises people who have successfully passed all the various stages of the recruitment process, including the psychometric testing and are 'ready to go' when a vacancy becomes available, that suggests an investment of well over a million pounds in OPC testing alone.



Not really. 8000 applicants does not equal 8000 people in the talent pool, or indeed anywhere near that figure. The sifting process would no doubt get rid of well over half and then of the 'best' candidates sent to OPC, the majority of them would fail the testing.

This is correct, I read that it’s roughly a 90% fail rate. Also consider that once an individual fails twice, that’s it. The numbers are highly exaggerated.

 

[ComUtoR]

This seems to me to be beyond unlikely.

Sadly, it was a true comment.

Assuming the 'talent pool' comprises people who have successfully passed all the various stages of the recruitment process

Not specifically and I think this is also part of the confusion. There is an epic thread around somewhere when GTR were recruiting directly into a 'Talent pool' for future vacancies. It's a perfect example where the pool spiralled out of control and where people were at multiple stages. Not forgetting that each TOC does things their own way. Not all TOCs will do the MMI before the DMI and vice versa.

'talent pool' is very generic.

I have no intent to move into TOC recruitment but I'd be interested to see some hard data for who is sitting where and what they have or havent yet achieved.

Not really. 8000 applicants does not equal 8000 people in the talent pool, or indeed anywhere near that figure. The sifting process would no doubt get rid of well over half and then of the 'best' candidates sent to OPC, the majority of them would fail the testing.

Very true. However, it highlights how easy it is to stack candidates. With talent pools lasting extended periods the numbers just continually grow. As I mentioned, there appears to be no cut off. Just keep dumping people into the 'talent pool'

I was given the failure rate of just the MMI alone a few weeks ago and I was stunned. It's nowhere near where.yiu think it is. Again, it would be interesting to see a break down of which test causes the most failures. The data is out there; just a real pain in the ass to find. I'm shocked nobody asks via an FOI request.

 

[12LDA28C]

'talent pool' is very generic.

I have no intent to move into TOC recruitment but I'd be interested to see some hard data for who is sitting where and what they have or havent yet achieved.

As far as I'm concerned, a 'Talent Pool' should comprise people who have passed every stage of the selection process and are ready to be employed as soon as a suitable vacancy arises.

It should NOT be people who haven't passed all those stages - what's the point having hundreds of people in the talent pool if more than half of them would fail OPC testing and therefore not be suitable for employment?

Of course if you are a candidate who has passed all OPC tests recently and is sitting in various TOC talent pools then you are in the fortunate position of being able to pick and choose your employer, and the other TOCs would lose out - that's the chance a TOC takes by having someone ready to be employed waiting for a vacancy.

 

[ComUtoR]

As far as I'm concerned, a 'Talent Pool' should comprise people who have passed every stage of the selection process and are ready to be employed as soon as a suitable vacancy arises.

At what point are you in a talent pool and not 'just being processed' ?

8k applicants. Let's be very generous and we'll cull 50% purely on an initial sift.

4k applicants will need either another sift or do they sit in a pool because they passed stage 1 ? 4k will take almost a year to process further. They will need to be told they have passed the first stage.

10% pass OPC (fully) still giving us 400 left to get through a DMI. The Driver Manager teams cannot process that many in a short space of time and there just aren't that many vacancies. Somewhere do these 400 people go or do we kick them from the process ?

My depot has approx 7 vacancies this year. My TOC will process around 150 trainees. Even if we kept the entire 400 they will still need to sit somewhere. By the time a new campaign rolls around, the backlog just grows further. The alternative is to never start a new campaign and drain the pool first. I don't think that is in anyone's interest.

It should NOT be people who haven't passed all those stages - what's the point having hundreds of people in the talent pool if more than half of them would fail OPC testing and therefore not be suitable for employment?

We'd need a recruitment specialist to answer that. Other than keeping the pools filled with fresh fish; I'm unsure. It works in everyone's favor by keeping recruitment open to candidates and TOC. Difficult to answer and tbh, I find it a little frustrating myself.

 

[Aviator88]

Yeah I saw that as well. I don’t believe a word of it. Sure many people apply for it but I cannot imagine THAT many people passing all the stages, all of them passing the DMI and them still recruiting more and ALL for the same TOC? I am completely certain that’s absolute nonsense.

Based on a 50%/90% failure rate at initial sift/OPC testing and DMI respectively, such a talent pool would be the result of ~ 60,000 initial applications. Depending on the recruitment needs of the TOC, this would be the cumulative result of 10-30 years of recruitment. All anecdotal, but it gives you an idea of the ball park we're talking about.

 

[Horizon22]

At what point are you in a talent pool and not 'just being processed' ?

8k applicants. Let's be very generous and we'll cull 50% purely on an initial sift.

4k applicants will need either another sift or do they sit in a pool because they passed stage 1 ? 4k will take almost a year to process further. They will need to be told they have passed the first stage.

10% pass OPC (fully) still giving us 400 left to get through a DMI. The Driver Manager teams cannot process that many in a short space of time and there just aren't that many vacancies. Somewhere do these 400 people go or do we kick them from the process?

That to me is a difference in terminology - is it really a “talent pool” if you are still progressing through the stages (due to various constraints) of an initial advert and haven’t reached the end of the process?

I personally only describe someone being “in the talent pool” if they have passed everything and, instead of being offered a substantive vacancy (because one doesn’t exist), they are placed into the talent pool.

 

[WombleGuard]

That to me is a difference in terminology - is it really a “talent pool” if you are still progressing through the stages (due to various constraints) of an initial advert and haven’t reached the end of the process?

I personally only describe someone being “in the talent pool” if they have passed everything and, instead of being offered a substantive vacancy (because one doesn’t exist), they are placed into the talent pool.

Exactly. This is the wording from GWR email I received:

"We are pleased to inform you that you have completed the assessment process and were successful at your interview for this role.

You have therefore been placed in the talent pool for Trainee Train Driver at *****"

So, to GWR a talent pool contains only those who have passed everything.

 

[AG1994]

Yes.

I’m aware of TOCs having people actively in their talent pool that have gone back into recruitment mode and hire new people, placing them onto courses whilst the talent pools are forgotten about.

You can’t trust the woefully poor HR teams on railways to be on top of stuff like this; it’s so poor I can imagine them hand filing A4 sheets with people’s names on, locking the cabinet, leaving the job and not giving the keys to the next person.

On the other hand I’m aware of smarter TOCs and a FOC lapping up other people’s talent pools because the original employer paid for all of their testing and it’s a great way to save money. I would recommend anyone in a talent pool to rewrite their CV advertising their psychometrics passes and then applying everywhere - I know my TOC likes these easy hire people.

Companies I know of that have (in the last 5 years odd) commenced people’s training whilst they’ve got people ready to go in talent pools are: Avanti, Chiltern, WMT.

 

[Horizon22]

Yes.

I’m aware of TOCs having people actively in their talent pool that have gone back into recruitment mode and hire new people, placing them onto courses whilst the talent pools are forgotten about.

You can’t trust the woefully poor HR teams on railways to be on top of stuff like this; it’s so poor I can imagine them hand filing A4 sheets with people’s names on, locking the cabinet, leaving the job and not giving the keys to the next person.

On the other hand I’m aware of smarter TOCs and a FOC lapping up other people’s talent pools because the original employer paid for all of their testing and it’s a great way to save money. I would recommend anyone in a talent pool to rewrite their CV advertising their psychometrics passes and then applying everywhere - I know my TOC likes these easy hire people.

Companies I know of that have (in the last 5 years odd) commenced people’s training whilst they’ve got people ready to go in talent pools are: Avanti, Chiltern, WMT.

I wouldn’t say so much it’s they’re “woefully poor” just very under-resourced for the work that needs doing so things slip and other priorities take over plus these roles aren’t always the highest paid, often being starter jobs.

 

[387star]

Given they affect people's mental health they surely need looking at especially if you're an internal candidate
Also it's a nonsense you have to reapply for different depots within the same company although this rule is TOC dependant. I was in a very dark place due to waits in pools with my initial elation gradually eroded till I became very low and pessimistic. Some would say suck it up or that's life but these are people's lives that are being messed around with. The fact you only get two attempts to pass the tests and they have an expiry date doesn't help.

 

[387star]

As far as I'm concerned, a 'Talent Pool' should comprise people who have passed every stage of the selection process and are ready to be employed as soon as a suitable vacancy arises.

It should NOT be people who haven't passed all those stages - what's the point having hundreds of people in the talent pool if more than half of them would fail OPC testing and therefore not be suitable for employment?

Of course if you are a candidate who has passed all OPC tests recently and is sitting in various TOC talent pools then you are in the fortunate position of being able to pick and choose your employer, and the other TOCs would lose out - that's the chance a TOC takes by having someone ready to be employed waiting for a vacancy.

I feel like they wouldn't care as so many pass the tests these days.

 

[43066]

They sound like more trouble than they are worth for both TOC and candidate, and I think if companies need staff they should just recruit when they actually need them instead of what can be a potentially unsustainable business model that will end up practically stringing along many hopeful railway workers who will face increasing frustration years down the line when they still aren't getting job offers.

I think what the OP is overlooking is that nobody is compelling TOCs to run talent pools, and if the companies felt they were “more trouble than they were worth” they would simply abandon them. The fact they haven’t is surely evidence that they serve a useful propose. Rail recruitment by its nature is slow and cumbersome because training schools have finite capacity to teach rules and traction courses, and there are a finite number of DIs, so a pool of vetted applicants enables supply to be regulated accordingly.

Although frustrating for candidates, there’s also no indication that the use of talent pools is “unsustainable”, or that it has reduced applications, with many roles continuing to attract hundreds or even thousands of applicants per place.

 

[Terry844]

As nobody really knows how these talent pools are being run everything is speculation.

I myself believe the term talent pool should just be used for those that have passed all testing and interviews and are just being held before a vacancy and a place on a course is available.

Now all companies will want to employ the best candidates they can get so if the talent pool has X number of people in it but only 2 or three for a particular depot. Said company runs a new recruitment campaign they have a couple of options 1, they can take people out of the pool and replace the pool with those that get through the latest recruitment program. 2, they go through the recruitment and then pick the best candidates out of the pool and what they have just put through testing with the rest staying in the pool. 3, they drain the pool and start over with just the candidates on the latest recruitment.

My personal experience I was not in a pool I went straight through from application to starting a course, however there was several people on my course that had spent varying time in a pool from several months to a couple of years.

 

[AG1994]

I wouldn’t say so much it’s they’re “woefully poor” just very under-resourced for the work that needs doing so things slip and other priorities take over plus these roles aren’t always the highest paid, often being starter jobs.

A HR department being under-resourced and underpaid makes them woefully poor in my mind! Two rather critical issues!

 

[WombleGuard]

In my experience GWR do a good job of staying in touch with "swimmers". I have been in pool (proper pool having passed everything) for a year and have had two proactive updates from them. Plus they always respond courteously to ad-hoc requests within 2-7 days. No complaints here.

 

[AG1994]

In my experience GWR do a good job of staying in touch with "swimmers". I have been in pool (proper pool having passed everything) for a year and have had two proactive updates from them. Plus they always respond courteously to ad-hoc requests within 2-7 days. No complaints here.

Are you confident they haven’t started drivers on courses direct from application since you’ve been in the pool though?

Good contact is fine, but if they’re leaving you in there when they shouldn’t be that’s not fine!

 

[Horizon22]

A HR department being under-resourced and underpaid makes them woefully poor in my mind! Two rather critical issues!

But the people do the best with what is available to them I suppose is my point but TOCs across the board should definitely strengthen this area. It will also resolve a number of issues downstream by getting people productive quicker but this indirect benefit seems to have been lost on some.

 

[12LDA28C]

At what point are you in a talent pool and not 'just being processed' ?

8k applicants. Let's be very generous and we'll cull 50% purely on an initial sift.

4k applicants will need either another sift or do they sit in a pool because they passed stage 1 ? 4k will take almost a year to process further. They will need to be told they have passed the first stage.

There is more than one stage of sifting before applicants proceed towards OPC testing. At the very least these should comprise an initial questionnaire, a second SJE-type exercise and then potentially an online VSE test or similar.

Only the very best applicants should be sent through to the full OPC testing which would cut the numbers down well below the kind of figures you are quoting.

I personally only describe someone being “in the talent pool” if they have passed everything and, instead of being offered a substantive vacancy (because one doesn’t exist), they are placed into the talent pool.

Agreed.