Lack of jobs? Or lack of unskilled jobs

[Anna B]

There is a shortage of social workers, apparently, to be a social worker you need "three-year undergraduate degree or a two-year postgraduate degree".

 

Isnt the main quality of a good social worker common sense, so why all this extra stuff?

It is the same in other careers, they are starting to want people with a degree, is that a good thing?

 

As I understand it social workers are being made redundant / vacancies not being filled, and the work is being sold off to other companies who do it for less.

[salsafan]

If you have anywhere near the skills necessary apply anyway. I work in IT many recruiters put out adverts which amount to a wishlist of skills and experience, even for what are effectively junior positions. If you talk to the people who are actually doing the job you'll find they're perfectly prepared to bring in people who don't have all skills listed, one company put out several adverts in quick succession with a wide variety of skills and experience required, turned out it was the same job.

 

Actually those are not "junior" positions. But they are the skills from the previous person that did the role. What they really should have done is to ask for a lower spec person, and this is the fault on the recruiter side, cos they want too highly skilled individual (using an old employee's CV) for the new hire and they get confused, because they do not know the industry at all, or the fact that they have moved their structure to a lower one, post implementation. This is why you get some very mixed-up departments, and a lot of chaos, and confusion overall.

 

Most people who is not that great at their job, just tick the basic requirements, and then move on, that is why you get this bad situation happening, and further outsourcing occurs. It is also why the industry drive a lot of competent people into opening their own consultancies to work instead. The person that is left is just a more glorified receptionist, and is not aware of certain things, but have a team of outsourcers to back them up in case anything bad happens.

 

For anyone entering IT, I would suggest that they be frank and write their CV in a more structured way. e.g.

C++ = Entry level

Informatix = Advanced

 

Just list them out, and let the recruiters deal with the rest.

[turtles]

Over qualified and age does not mean anything

Its all about if you want to do the job and they think you could do it and fit in...

 

If you have a non judgmental approach you will do fine otherwise you may need some personal development.

 

You getting interviews so you must be doing something right...work on your weakness and you will be ok

 

That is an absolute load of rubbish, I've worked in recruitment, and currently work in a different sector. Unskilled jobs are filled by unskilled people, if we determined a person to be overqualified for the position (whether that's previous experience, or qualifications) they generally wouldn't get through the process. The thought of most employers, and recruiters, is that anyone over qualified will leave at the first sign of a job more related to their skills and qualifications.

 

Even in my younger days, I was turned down for admin jobs because I had three years previous experience, with them believing I was overqualified (I only had A Levels at this point).

 

---------- Post added 20-03-2014 at 16:38 ----------

 

You saying a lot more then that....read your own post.

 

The problem with making assumptions is you will never get it right

 

Attitude is everything...always was... current climate or not

 

You can't possibly be that dense?

 

Attitude is a major factor in whether you want to get work or not, but it's not everything. Jobs are being applied for in their masses, I've had very skilled positions on my desk to fill, and typically between 2004-2006 I would get maybe 5 applications if I was lucky. The same position came up last year, I had around 150 applicants.

[salsafan]

That is an absolute load of rubbish, I've worked in recruitment, and currently work in a different sector. Unskilled jobs are filled by unskilled people, if we determined a person to be overqualified for the position (whether that's previous experience, or qualifications) they generally wouldn't get through the process. The thought of most employers, and recruiters, is that anyone over qualified will leave at the first sign of a job more related to their skills and qualifications.

May I ask you a professional question ? If you were given the responsibility to recruit for a position that requires less skills from the candidate. Do you ope up the position for both skilled workers, and unskilled workers alike ? As my understanding by the employment law was that, if you are qualified, then you will be considered. Is this not the case ? Are there any guidelines within the recruitment sector which promotes these kind of understandings?

 

Also, what do you actually do if you have a tight deadline, but actually still require the position to be filled, do you take on candidates based on what is available in that resource pool, or do you actually leave this open and let it be unfulfilled ? I have seen an increase of HR roles in recent years for "Learning and Development", I wonder whether this coincide with what is happening within the recruitment sector.

 

Even in my younger days, I was turned down for admin jobs because I had three years previous experience, with them believing I was overqualified (I only had A Levels at this point).

I recall this experience also in the Sheffield agencies, and only 2 or 3 agencies took me seriously and put me forward towards the position. One position I did get in the end, but I had declined as I was offered another position elsewhere.

It was interesting to see who puts me forward even though I was indeed qualified for the admin roles. I think only a handful of interviewers asked me professionally about my goals and reasons for the position, than the recruitment agency asking me indirectly whether I will stay in that role and for long how.

 

You can't possibly be that dense?

 

Attitude is a major factor in whether you want to get work or not, but it's not everything. Jobs are being applied for in their masses, I've had very skilled positions on my desk to fill, and typically between 2004-2006 I would get maybe 5 applications if I was lucky. The same position came up last year, I had around 150 applicants.

I never understood this argument, why others use the term "attitude", when in reality, one must be "professional" surely and keep the focus of the relationship and the expectation on the side of the recruitment only and not allow any further biase to happen and occur ?

[alchresearch]

That is an absolute load of rubbish, I've worked in recruitment, and currently work in a different sector. Unskilled jobs are filled by unskilled people, if we determined a person to be overqualified for the position (whether that's previous experience, or qualifications) they generally wouldn't get through the process. The thought of most employers, and recruiters, is that anyone over qualified will leave at the first sign of a job more related to their skills and qualifications.

 

There are loads of reasons why an overqualified person might want a certain job.

 

I certainly wouldn't and don't discount anyone when recruiting.

[Mecky]

I certainly wouldn't and don't discount anyone when recruiting.

 

So you'd employ twenty people to do the job of one person?

[davyboy]

Many years ago in the mid 1960s I left a scientific skilled job. £14/week

It was in the days where you could walk into the Labour exchange and get a job.

I was told I was over qualified for the sort of jobs they had,but I needed any job that paid a reasonable amount. But I was shown the door.

I saw an ad in the local paper for line workers in a car company, I applied and lied that I had no qualifications.

The pay for the shift work ( nights and days)was £7 more than my skilled job.

At the interview was asked if I was mechanically minded (I am not) "what do you mean I asked"

"If I said pick up that spanner would you know what I meant?"

"Of course" I said.

I got the job and it was b....y hard work, almost slave labour, BUT I saved some money and it saved my bacon until I got back into my career.

That scenario is not possible these days and I feel desperately sad for today's unemployed.

(If you see a suffix C reg Ford Zephyr it might be one of mine)

Edited March 21, 2014 by davyboy

[Happ Hazzard]

It is far easier to apply for jobs nowadays than it was in the past. Sending your CV to an employer takes seconds. Even filling in an online application takes far less time than filling in a paper form, you can copy and paste from your CV and re-use the same application for jobs from the same firm. This has to be a factor in the number of applicants for jobs.

[SportsTrophy]

I would say there is a lack of skilled managers and hr departments unable to read trends and plan for the future.

 

There will be a surge of work as things improve which will stress the current work force until new employees are skilled.

 

A work life balance is a myth with some employers asking staff to work longer instead of employing more people. Such managers are incompetent and needs to be overseen.

[alchresearch]

So you'd employ twenty people to do the job of one person?

 

What are you on about? I posted that I wouldn't discriminate an over qualified person from an interview.