Should Talent Pools be abolished?

[Sorcerer]

So the general consensus here is that while talent pools shouldn't be scrapped, they do most certainly need a restructuring, and in this thread I have learned that "talent pool" is a broad term that doesn't always refer to candidates who have actually passed the assessments including the DMI. I said I was open to having my view changed, and now I'm very much on board with the idea of restructuring the talent bank system in a way that is sustainable for recruitment teams at TOCs to keep up with as well as try to ensure candidates aren't bypassed before new recruitment starts. Maybe a standardised system of selection (i.e. candidate scoring relative to the criteria) would be helpful as well. I know it might leave some people in the pool for years but having a system based on score allows the TOC to select people best suited for the task rather than a first-come-first-served basis.

 

[WombleGuard]

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!

There have been no courses for my depot since I applied.

Speculation for speculations sake is pointless, unhelpful and will serve only to freak out the worriers on this forum. Perhaps that is what some posters want?

Deal in facts from your TOC/FOC people.

 

[Horizon22]

So the general consensus here is that while talent pools shouldn't be scrapped, they do most certainly need a restructuring, and in this thread I have learned that "talent pool" is a broad term that doesn't always refer to candidates who have actually passed the assessments including the DMI. I said I was open to having my view changed, and now I'm very much on board with the idea of restructuring the talent bank system in a way that is sustainable for recruitment teams at TOCs to keep up with as well as try to ensure candidates aren't bypassed before new recruitment starts. Maybe a standardised system of selection (i.e. candidate scoring relative to the criteria) would be helpful as well. I know it might leave some people in the pool for years but having a system based on score allows the TOC to select people best suited for the task rather than a first-come-first-served basis.

I think many of us are on board with the restructuring (I listed my criteria earlier) but whether it actually happens is a different matter!

That being said, 39% have voted "Yes" although there haven't been many comments as to why people voted this way.

 

[Sly Sloth]

So the general consensus here is that while talent pools shouldn't be scrapped, they do most certainly need a restructuring, and in this thread I have learned that "talent pool" is a broad term that doesn't always refer to candidates who have actually passed the assessments including the DMI. I said I was open to having my view changed, and now I'm very much on board with the idea of restructuring the talent bank system in a way that is sustainable for recruitment teams at TOCs to keep up with as well as try to ensure candidates aren't bypassed before new recruitment starts. Maybe a standardised system of selection (i.e. candidate scoring relative to the criteria) would be helpful as well. I know it might leave some people in the pool for years but having a system based on score allows the TOC to select people best suited for the task rather than a first-come-first-served basis.

Whilst this is a nice thread the reality is there are hundreds/thousands of people who want to be on the railway, drivers especially , so the tocs know that most will jump through hoops to get the chance. Talent pools are there for the benefit of the employer and only the employer

 

[12LDA28C]

Talent pools are there for the benefit of the employer and only the employer

If they are used correctly then they certainly benefit the applicant as they should in theory have a guaranteed job when the first suitable vacancy comes up. The key part of this statement is 'if they are used correctly' of course.

 

[AG1994]

There have been no courses for my depot since I applied.

Speculation for speculations sake is pointless, unhelpful and will serve only to freak out the worriers on this forum. Perhaps that is what some posters want?

Deal in facts from your TOC/FOC people.

I asked you the question, asking a question cannot be speculation.

From my own experience I can add the following:

I know someone in a talent pool for Chiltern, and I know someone who applied after them and got put straight onto the next course.

I sat in the pool for WMT, they went out to hire again and put people straight into courses from that application, didn’t even contact me. Didn’t hear a peep from the day I went into it, didn’t even have a way to contact them.

I know from here people are in the talent pool for Avanti in Euston, and I also know of people who have applied for Avanti very recently and are on the upcoming courses.

I repeat my advice, if you’re in a talent pool use your passes and apply everywhere if you really want it. As a 10 year reader of this forum it’s clear that many do not ever become a driver despite being in the talent pools. Some talent pools you’re waiting to step into a dead man’s shoes, some you’re waiting to step into 4-10 dead men’s shoes because that’s the amount they need to justify running a course!

 

[Mattydo]

To be honest it's subjective I guess. I still technically have an open application for a trainee driver position after receiving an email saying "we can't wait to meet you and will be in touch to book an interview as soon as we can". Since that email I have been hired, trained and am out driving for another TOC. One I oddly didn't apply for a driver position for (there were none open at the time) but got put through after ticking the "happy to be considered for other positions box".

That second TOC is famous for constantly being in a state of hiring with some candidates at all sorts of different stages.

I don't necessarily consider myself in a Talent pool for TOC 1 despite being offered an interview that never came, but that's the subjective bit I guess.

To get 3000 people into a talent pool that consisted of only fully assessed applicants (DMI and MMI complete too) represents a significant amount of driver manager time (2 years of one person constantly interviewing and passing every applicant) so I'd see it as closer to impossible than unlikely (DM's only just manage to find time for regular competency assessments let alone recruitment at that level). But to say 3000 people were at some point in the system and yet to be discounted is actually probably on the low side.

 

[ComUtoR]

If they are used correctly then they certainly benefit the applicant as they should in theory have a guaranteed job when the first suitable vacancy comes up.

At my TOC if you have a DMI and then fail it, there is an option to send you into a talent pool to apply again in 6 months. Personally i think this is a good thing. It gives people a second chance without being permanently binned or forced to go back to step 1.

Is your above statement suggesting that only those who have passed EVERY stage; including a DMI. Should be in a talent pool ?

Maybe a standardised system of selection (i.e. candidate scoring relative to the criteria) would be helpful as well.

My TOC already does this.

I know it might leave some people in the pool for years but having a system based on score allows the TOC to select people best suited for the task

If you have a load of people sitting in the pools with just average scores, how do you recruit for new and potentially better blood ? By only choosing from the existing pool, you limit the quality of candidate.

rather than a first-come-first-served basis.

Only picking from a pool IS a first come first served system. You have to drain the pool first every time.

I would potentially support all pools being reset every 6 months, maybe a year due to the slow nature of rail recruitment.

 

[Frothy_B]

I think many of us are on board with the restructuring (I listed my criteria earlier) but whether it actually happens is a different matter!

That being said, 39% have voted "Yes" although there haven't been many comments as to why people voted this way.

I voted yes. I understand they are beneficial to the companies concerned but I feel they can be disruptive to the lives of applicants, especially when they aren't utilised in the way applicants are lead to believe.

Granted alot of my dislike of them stems from my own personality and how I view things as an individual. I'm not the kind of person to change jobs on a whim, if I'm applying for jobs it's because I wish to leave my current job. I'd be prepared to wait if it felt like there was light at the end of the tunnel, and that a phonecall would come in the end. I'd feel pretty aggrieved though if I'd proven that I was good enough for a job, put my life on hold for a year or more, then I saw the company was starting a whole new process at the same location and were sending successful applicants straight on to courses. It just seems like a complete waste of *my* time.

However, the system is the way it is and if you want to get onto the railway you have to have a bit of luck on your side alongside playing the game.

 

[Horizon22]

I voted yes. I understand they are beneficial to the companies concerned but I feel they can be disruptive to the lives of applicants, especially when they aren't utilised in the way applicants are lead to believe.

Granted alot of my dislike of them stems from my own personality and how I view things as an individual. I'm not the kind of person to change jobs on a whim, if I'm applying for jobs it's because I wish to leave my current job. I'd be prepared to wait if it felt like there was light at the end of the tunnel, and that a phonecall would come in the end. I'd feel pretty aggrieved though if I'd proven that I was good enough for a job, put my life on hold for a year or more, then I saw the company was starting a whole new process at the same location and were sending successful applicants straight on to courses. It just seems like a complete waste of *my* time.

However, the system is the way it is and if you want to get onto the railway you have to have a bit of luck on your side alongside playing the game.

I can appreciate that. I think if they were managed as they should be then, more people would understand their worth. At present, they are becoming unsustainable and offering false hope to many. The issue is there are so many chasing a very small number of roles, particularly for driver roles.

 

[ComUtoR]

At present, they are becoming unsustainable and offering false hope to many.

What's better. False hope or no hope ?

Getting all the way to the last hurdle and being turned away with no chance to reapply doesn't help candidate or TOC

The issue is there are so many chasing a very small number of roles, particularly for driver roles.

Yep, totally agreed.

That being said, 39% have voted "Yes" although there haven't been many comments as to why people voted this way.

Or offered any alternative.

 

[12LDA28C]

At my TOC if you have a DMI and then fail it, there is an option to send you into a talent pool to apply again in 6 months. Personally i think this is a good thing. It gives people a second chance without being permanently binned or forced to go back to step 1.

Is your above statement suggesting that only those who have passed EVERY stage; including a DMI. Should be in a talent pool ?

A talent pool should only be populated with candidates who have passed every stage of the selection process, including DMI. Effectively, they should be ready to be offered a job as soon as a vacancy arises, that's how I understand it.

In your above example, there must be a reason why somebody fails a DMI, clearly the interviewer(s) feel they don't reach the required standard on the day. This of course could be said of any interview for any job where a 'second chance' wouldn't be available.

 

[43066]

At my TOC if you have a DMI and then fail it, there is an option to send you into a talent pool to apply again in 6 months. Personally i think this is a good thing. It gives people a second chance without being permanently binned or forced to go back to step 1.

I have always understood talent pool to mean people who have passed all stages other than the medical (which for obvious reasons is done just prior to starting), and are just waiting for a start date and employment contract. Someone who hasn’t yet passed a DMI is making their way through the process.

Is does seem odd, not to mention a very strange use of resources, to persist with people who haven’t made the grade, especially when dealing with such oversubscribed roles.

EDIT: I see @Horizon22 made a similar point up thread!

 

[SuperS16v]

Talent pools make sense because the recruitment process is so long. Once openings appear they need to fill the spaces as fast as possible from the pool.

I agree the whole recruitment process and talent pool needs restructuring with clear communication throughout. In my opinion it’s not fair for people to sit in talent pools to only have them open recruitment then the new candidates leap frog everyone else in the talent pool and get offered a job.

How hard can it be to keep a list of people in the talent pool and you offer jobs to people from top to bottom. If you enter the talent pool you go to the bottom and wait in line.

 

[43066]

In my opinion it’s not fair for people to sit in talent pools to only have them open recruitment then the new candidates leap frog everyone else in the talent pool and get offered a job.

It isn’t designed to be fair. The only sensible way to approach it as a candidate is not to “put your life on hold”, and just work on the basis you don’t have a job until you’ve got a start date and signed and returned a contract.

The other side of the coin is that being in a pool doesn’t prevent you from applying for other roles, and indeed personally I’d get on and do that, rather than waiting in a pool for months or years, as many seem to.

 

[Sly Sloth]

The other side of the coin is that being in a pool doesn’t prevent you from applying for other roles, and indeed personally I’d get on and do that, rather than waiting in a pool for months or years, as many seem to.

Just a word of warning to anyone in any GTR talent pools…..if you’re in a talent pool and apply for any other role within GTR you would be removed from the talent pool which you currently occupy

 

[mobotmat21]

Hey there,

First time messaging on the forum. So I hope I’m not on the wrong thread.

Does anybody know if GWR are taking picks from their pools to begin as trainee drivers recently? Or have they put a pause on it? Been in the pool since Aug ‘21

Thanks in advance

 

[Boski]

I have been told I have passed my interview, but waiting for a start date no reference of being a talent pool from HR, would I be classed as being in one?

 

[Horizon22]

I have been told I have passed my interview, but waiting for a start date no reference of being a talent pool from HR, would I be classed as being in one?

Not necessarily. Honestly it depends what you were told individually and you’d have to confirm with the TOC. It sounds like you could be but it’s hard to confirm. Hopefully they should follow something up in writing. It might not be explicitly called a “talent pool” though.

 

[Boski]

Not necessarily. Honestly it depends what you were told individually and you’d have to confirm with the TOC. It sounds like you could be but it’s hard to confirm. Hopefully they should follow something up in writing. It might not be explicitly called a “talent pool” though.

Its a guard role with SWR, been told no current vacancies at my depot and will get a start date when one becomes available.

 

[12LDA28C]

Its a guard role with SWR, been told no current vacancies at my depot and will get a start date when one becomes available.

Sounds like the definition of a talent pool to me.

 

[Horizon22]

Its a guard role with SWR, been told no current vacancies at my depot and will get a start date when one becomes available.

Yes I'd say its a talent pool.

 

[baz962]

Sadly, it was a true comment.



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.



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.

I was told by the OPC that the group bourdon is the most failed test.

 

[ComUtoR]

I was told by the OPC that the group bourdon is the most failed test.

I can believe that. Almost everyone who failed on my assessment day, failed on the dots.

I know which has the highest pass rate

 

[baz962]

I can believe that. Almost everyone who failed on my assessment day, failed on the dots.

I know which has the highest pass rate

Probably the glop. I don't think I know anyone ever failing that test.

 

[ComUtoR]

Hahahahahaaaa !!! Awesome response ! I totally forgot about the glop test. Weirdly I still remember what the "glop" test says. It's basically a description of sandite markers.

It's not something I support but do you believe that posting test pass rates would be beneficial ?

 

[43066]

Hahahahahaaaa !!! Awesome response ! I totally forgot about the glop test. Weirdly I still remember what the "glop" test says. It's basically a description of sandite markers.

It's not something I support but do you believe that posting test pass rates would be beneficial ?

People focus too much on pass rates. At the end of the day it doesn’t matter how everyone else does, it’s how you do that counts!

 

[baz962]

Hahahahahaaaa !!! Awesome response ! I totally forgot about the glop test. Weirdly I still remember what the "glop" test says. It's basically a description of sandite markers.

It's not something I support but do you believe that posting test pass rates would be beneficial ?

You forgot the memory test , how ironic