Norwich for Jobs: Published Blog Entry
Upon graduating, personal expectations in the world of
employment are high. You’ll find yourself a job, doing something you want to
do, earning enough to start paying back your student debt. It won’t take much;
a decent CV, a few applications and maybe one or two interviews before you fall
into job-security heaven. Okay, even graduates such as myself know that’s an
unrealistic utopia – but for most, beginning to achieve something from your
degree is extensively difficult – to an entirely unexpected level. But can all
the responsibility lie with the applicants and their attitudes? Are we simply
too arrogant, but ultimately unprepared? From my own experiences, and feedback
from those in similar positions, no. Many employers are unfair, unrealistic,
and exploitative due to an unstable jobs market.
First is the unrealistic
perception of ‘graduate credentials’.
A typical graduate job in marketing, for example, requires ‘at least 2 years
previous experience in a marketing role’. So in other words, you aren’t looking
for a recent graduate at all, then? Students that have been studying towards a
degree for three years simply do not have any ‘years of experience’ to put in
their résumé – to expect such vast experience becomes a major hindrance on
graduates finding work in their desired fields, leaving them to apply for
positions they have no interest in.
Second, is it so hard to give an automated response to
unsuccessful applicants? I don’t think so, and I think employers owe that much
to applicants who have shown an interest in working for their company, and
bothered to apply accordingly. Too often applicants are forever left in the dark about positions applied for, which in my
opinion, should be given closer scrutiny by a government seeking to control
levels of unemployment.
It’s not just the employers either. Although very
differentiated in their approach and helpfulness, recruitment agencies often follow those same negative trends set by
some employers. Whilst some (typically smaller, more intimate agencies) listen
to your strengths and desires in work and offer genuine help; others consider
bombarding you with emails regarding jobs you aren't qualified for (or
interested in) in an attempt to get you off their books as quickly as possible,
as a service well provided.
Worst of the lot, however, is false job advertisements. The best one I've come across is a
self-proclaimed ‘paid graduate training in marketing strategies and business
operations’. Or, in other words, door-to-door sales. The cunning plan here is
to appeal directly to the vast audience of unemployed youth by disguising the
role as an enticing opportunity, only to send applicants on a ‘trial
assessment’ selling their products around a neighbourhood, without pay. By the
end of the day, applicants realise their time has been wasted, but the sneaky
employers have just been given a willing workforce for the day, free of charge.
Such exploitation should be more widely publicised to prevent others falling
into similar traps.
This is not to say all employers and organisations are
accountable for such negativity. Some
deserve strong credit. I'm sure Capita won’t mind me mentioning them as a
shining light amongst a largely unhelpful market. After just one stage in the
application progress, I had received a personal phone call including very
useful feedback and a positive endorsement to apply again once the scheme
re-opened – it doesn't take much. Even a simple confirmation of a received
application, followed by – ‘if you don’t hear back by… we thank you for your
interest, but have unfortunately decided not to follow up on your application’
– would suffice. Keep pushing, job-hunters!
