Unfair Interview - SA government organisation

malkakas on 23/05/2014 - 11:19
Last edited 23/05/2014 - 13:57

Hi guys,

I need your kind advise on something I experience in a public sector job interview.

I am working in IT industry and recently I applied to a role in one of SA state government organisations. I got a call for an interview. After the interview I noticed something was not right.

  1. The interview started 5 minutes after the scheduled time.
  2. Interview panel was all female (I don’t know if this is normal)
  3. It didn’t last more than 15 minutes (in my understanding 12-15 mins)
  4. I noticed that the interviewers had some set of questions, but they skipped through many questions.

At the end they said that they would come back to me by the end of the week and voila I got the call this morning to inform me that I have not been short listed for the next round.
The reason they gave for not short listing me was that I didn't show the necessary experience for the role. for gods sake how can I show all of my experience in a 12-15 mins interview.

I have over 7 years of experience in IT. For past 3.5 years I have been doing exactly the same things which they explained in the role description.

From my knowledge they interviewed only 5-6 candidates in the first round (they were going to hire 2 people).
I think something fishy went there from the beginning and the interviewers had already decided candidates they were going to hire (probably the applicants who had internal contacts) and used me to show in their recruitment summary report. Form my understanding this is Not an Equal Employment Opportunity.

Even I paid for 2 hours parking in Adelaide City because of this interview, but it lasted only 12-15 mins.
I spent days addressing the selection criteria, and again I spent days preparing for the interview.

  1. Is there something I can do about the dodgy hiring process of this organisation?
  2. Can I request a copy of my interview report?
  3. Can I request interview reports of other candidates?

Thanks in advance.

General Discussion

Comments

  • DaDuke2310 on 23/05/2014 - 11:35
    +3

    Whilst there are others far more qualified than I to advise you on the (legal) steps available to you to challenge a government interview process you might want to first question whether it is worth the effort. By lodging any form of criticism or complaint you are one individual challenging an organisation and multiple people who will all defend against you. You may not care that it would potentially mean never working for this organisation but these things, unfortunately sometimes, have a way of coming back to haunt you.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I am all in favour of righting wrongs and taking action 'against the man', but is it worth it in this instance? I would let it go and move on, their loss.

  • daalinz on 23/05/2014 - 11:44
    +21

    I work for a uni and by law they have to advertise externally for jobs. If they skip over people in interviews, they probably have the job lined up for an internal candidate. This is what I've noticed in "government like" organisations.

    • neil on 23/05/2014 - 12:11
      +11

      Yes, this is very common practice in both federal and state government organizations if the internal candidate meets the requirements.

      • ynot1985 on 23/05/2014 - 15:18
        +13

        from experience, a lot of government jobs are lined up by internal candidates. Sadly, sometimes it's not a matter of how good of a candidate you are, but rather who you know.

        I have previously applied for many Govt jobs, only to be turned down. I found out later through connections that the boss already knew who they wanted beforehand.

        Its sucks but there's not much you can do. It's almost impossible to prove they discriminated against you. They can make up any excuse under the sun i.e. wrong fit, didn't click with the interviewer etc.

        I just hate it because it's a tick the box exercise for them as they have to do it by law but it's in fact giving genuine candidates unrealistic hope of landing the role and not to mention, a complete waste of their time.

        • neil on 23/05/2014 - 15:58
          +3

          On the flip side, government agencies unlike private industry can't just appoint a person to a X role. In the private sector, its easy, here is a job, I'm appointing you to this job if you want it.

          How it usually works is that government agency has to write a position description which often has to incorporate some of the values of that government organization. Takes a lot of time. That has to be approved by HR and then put into the job system. Sometimes it goes into an internal job database open to existing employees, then after a bit of time into the large ones like Seek. An interview panel has to be organized to fit within everyones schedule. It's hugely frustrating and tedious on both sides.

        • ynot1985 on 23/05/2014 - 23:32
          +3

          I find most of the time, the job description is basically copied from the same template for a similar job that they have advertised before.

          Its an inconvenience for both parties but at least the people hiring get paid to do it. it's a part of their job. For applicants, its a complete waste of their time and resources (parking, taking time off work) without any form of compensation in return, so I don't feel sorry for government employers who have to go through the process cause at end of day its not a fair process for the applicants if they never really had any chance of landing the role

      • netsurfer on 24/05/2014 - 23:25

        Most, if not all government contracting jobs, especially IT related, must be advertised on the market, go through the interview process, before offering a contract extension to the current contractor right away. A few signs to spot these jobs: (a) very short time for you to apply and (b) very detailed descriptions of the role.

        Generally, if you know a mate in the company, he/she can check out for you. If it is one of those, there is no point applying unless you are only after a job interview experience. Those interviews could be short and very specific.

        Don't feel despair about those roles. The current contractor was the winning candidate at the beginning (when he applied for the role few years ago), he/she is still the best person for the job (due to the experience with the organisation) and it is the "trying to be fair but in reality just wasting everyone's time" system which causes these things to happen on a regular basis.

        Things have a way to even out eventually. Hopefully the OP's next interview will land him/her an even better job.

    • kangaroo on 23/05/2014 - 19:39
      +7

      I applied for a IT job at a Uni, the interview went very well, even though the panel was 15-20 mins late. I was confident that I will get that role. The lady who's role is being vacated was on the panel too.

      Before the interview I browsed the Staff page on the Uni website and found the hierarchy within the dept/team.

      After a few days I was notified that they found a better person for the role and my application was unsuccessful.

      A few weeks passed and I just checked the staff page again (suspecting internal recruitment). The girl who was in the deputy role for the position I applied was promoted into that position.

      Most government like organisation just follow the process so nobody can find fault at them, but in reality the role is already been determined. It's a waste of everyones time.

      • billyhoyle on 24/05/2014 - 08:52
        +1

        spot on - known as Merit and Equity principles and I know the govt. sector I am in (Education) has to advertise any position longer than 6 weeks and as you say often there is someone already in the role or already chosen for the role

        • John Dough on 24/05/2014 - 18:13
          +1

          Yes this happens a lot. You just have to impress enough that they consider you for other options. Sometimes a 'lined up' or already acting person can get shafted if you throw them a curve ball, but most gov jobs at the minute have someone lined up for the job, albeit unofficially. It wastes everyones time but theres not a lot anyone can do unless you can prove it wasn't a fair recruitment process, and even if it gets overturned you might not be too well liked from day 1.

    • onlyletters on 24/05/2014 - 08:34
      +2

      they all have 'legal' ways of getting around it, at the end of the day they shouldn't waste your time if they're not interested from the start by the sound of things.. anyway just turn the page and find somewhere else.

  • Dumax on 23/05/2014 - 12:01
    +18

    After the interview I noticed something was not right.

    2. Interview panel was all female (I don’t know if this is normal)

    Wow, you're really wondering why they didn't hire you?

    • malkakas on 23/05/2014 - 12:07
      +9

      I haven't been to any govt job interviews before. I really didn't know if there are regulations to keep the gender balance in interview panel.

      • StewBalls on 23/05/2014 - 16:11
        +21

        Sadly, in the politically correct, pussywhipped world we now live in, all female panels for a male candidate would be considered balanced, whereas an all male panel for a female candidate would be considered an unfair bias…go figure! :/

      • scrimshaw on 23/05/2014 - 20:34
        +3

        Most people who work in HR tend to be women. Human resource and recruiting is a female dominated position.

        I personally don't think there's a difference in interview methodologies between the 2 genders. Most of them follow a set script and ask you questions that hardly vary from person to person.

        • cwongtech on 24/05/2014 - 02:39
          +5

          Most people who work in HR tend to be women. Human resource and recruiting is a female dominated position.

          Yes.. and people wonder why there aren't many in leadership positions..
          Bachelor of ReadingResumes.

          Personally I would think poorly of a company that doesn't put at least ONE person on the interviewing panel/process that would be working frequently with the successful candidate. By working frequently, I don't mean paycheck operator.

      • [Deactivated] on 23/05/2014 - 23:02
        +3

        I'm rather amused. With an all female panel, you'd think a bloke interviewee might have a better chance (positive bias), rather than it working against you.

        A smart, well presented, experienced female being interviewed by an all male panel wouldn't have a lesser chance at getting the job than a smart, well presented, experienced male, IMO. Ditto with a male being interviewed by an all female panel. If you meet all the requirements and happen to be charming and personable, that's a pretty lucky bonus (dare I say it's worth exploiting for your own benefit).

        I guess it might depend on the industry though.

        Can't say it's ever hurt my chances when being interviewed by men. The only time I didn't land a job (coincidentally a government job too) was when I was interviewed by a panel comprised of 1 male and 3 females.

        Every other job I've ever been interviewed for has been with men. Got the job each time.

      • tiara on 24/05/2014 - 00:47
        -3

        For you even raising this question has raised my eyebrow

      • altomic on 25/05/2014 - 20:45

        please tell me you didn't walk into the interview room and say "how's it going bitches!"

    • chukkii on 24/05/2014 - 09:30
      +5

      How is that not a legitimate question/concern?

      Had the panel been men only I'm sure someone raise the same question.concern and no-one would bat an eye

      • Baghern on 24/05/2014 - 10:52
        -1

        Ignoring the fact that HR is generally female dominated.

        Positions of "power" is still heavily oriented towards male.

        So this is a unique situation, that just happens to hire another female.

        I've been in a similar situation where I was hired as a casual along with a Irish backpacking female.

        Our trainer/Supervisor was also Irish.

        The backpacker had no experience and learned slowly, I had experience and figured the job out pretty quickly.

        End of the week I was let go.

        Was pretty shocked and it was pretty obvious why. Wasn't even aware we were competing for a position.

        In the end, I'm pretty happy I didn't get the job, was a company in its death throes, but Still felt disgusted by the situation.

        Told my recruitment agent agency I didn't want anything to do with that company again.

  • ESEMCE on 23/05/2014 - 12:43
    +2

    And you're certain that you didn't fail on a question hence the skipping of followup questions?

    • malkakas on 23/05/2014 - 13:44

      No I don't remember such thing.

      • Ughhh on 23/05/2014 - 17:48
        +7

        So you are sure that all of your answers were 100% perfect and exactly what they were looking for? Including your personality and how well they think you will fit in?

  • earths_pacifist on 23/05/2014 - 12:50

    Especially lately, most Gov departments will not interview if they have internal applicants qualified for the role as they can fill jobs based on resumes.

    I have won 4 jobs over the past 10 years in Gov and not one interview has gone over 20 minutes (I did not know one person in any of the areas that hired me).

    Panelists will ask the same questions of all interviewees in regards to selection criteria - if they have skipped any they may have rated you based on your resume.

    Panellists can be made up of any gender and any level. Normally the only mandatory requirement is to have at least one person from another area sitting on it. Having a full panel of females is very normal.

    Departments cannot release any information about other applicants. However you can ask feedback, reports, ratings for yourself and there are complaint lines that investigate if you honestly believe that there were issues in the selections process.

    • easternculture on 23/05/2014 - 13:47
      +1

      Panellists can be made up of any gender and any level

      I know for a fact that in NSW government, panel members must be from both genders

      • earths_pacifist on 23/05/2014 - 14:11

        Sorry - I know it definately can be for Fed Depts and was the case with SA Gov unless this has changed.

      • grasstown on 24/05/2014 - 23:18

        EC is correct in nsw

  • 2ndeffort on 23/05/2014 - 12:59
    +13

    Don't know about the SA state government but most public service organisations thrive on conditions of employment rules. I can guarantee there would be a redress process if you wanted to take it that far. Unfortunately for you though the people that interviewed you would know a lot more about the rules for the redress process than you will. Potentially you might have to spend more money and certainly time writing up forms etc. If you are worried about the cost of car parking, probably best I don't mention Lawyers in this discussion either.

    There is probably some ombudsman etc you can approach but my advice would be to use this as a learning opportunity and direct your resources and efforts instead into your next opportunity. I sat on a panel once to hire an IT architect for a Federal Government appointment. The guy we interviewed could tick all of the boxes in terms of meeting the minimum requirements or we wouldn't have interviewed him. We genuinely had no sweetheart deals lined up for internal appointments and we were hoping the guy would be a good candidate as we desperately needed someone for the role. He was not a good candidate for the job though. Technically sound but the position was going to require the architect to conduct user workshops to identify requirements etc and substantial working with important stakeholders. The guy we interviewed had very poor communication skills to the point where members of the selection panel tried to prompt him to help him with answers and leading questions.

    I remember asking him if he had been involved running requirements workshops to which he said yes. I then asked if he could describe for us an example of a workshop he had successfully conducted and give us some of the outcomes. At no point in the interview did he look up from his shuffling feet under the desk and he stammered and said that whilst he had been in some workshops he didn't really want to talk about them……long silence….nothing and then another panel member jumped in to break the awkward silence. No way were we going to trust this guy with the running of important stakeholder engagements if he couldn't even speak to the interview panel. I appreciate the poor guy was nervous and perhaps not comfortable at public speaking but in all honesty, those skills were a fundamental part of the role up for hire. We didnt hire anybody for that role for another 6 months and had to hire in a contractor to cover as we couldn't find anybody else.

    The guy put in a redress and challenged missing out on the job. In his case we chose to go undermanned than hire him so it was hard to say we were biased in favour of another candidate. I cant remember his main gripe but I think he felt that because he ticked all of the written boxes we were honour bound to hire him regardless and that the interview was just a formality. He felt we underestimated his technical skills and put too much emphasis on his people skills. When challenged we pointed out to the authority that people skills were potentially the most important criteria for the role in question and that this guy had been exceedingly poor at these in the interview. There was some admin to justify all of this but in the end he was just told sorry you missed out and the review went against you as well.

  • easternculture on 23/05/2014 - 13:45
    +6

    From my experience with the public sector, is that they usually already have someone lined up for the Job and the interview is just a formality to comply with state EEO regulations.

    • diasaha on 25/05/2014 - 17:03

      This could be true if they are hiring only on person. But if they have multiple openings, then the chances for job to be real goes up significantly.

  • pax on 23/05/2014 - 13:54
    +1

    Without thinking of a form of redress for this interview, why don't you treat this as a learning experience and anything more is a bonus.

    Ask them for a report and feedback on your interview. Explain to them you have all the experience required, so want to improve your interview technique, so want to know where you fall down.

    You might find they are actually looking for someone who can grow into the role, and not someone who "For past 3.5 years I have been doing exactly the same things". Maybe they feel you would get bored in the role as there isn't much scope for anything more, so would leave in a short time frame.

    If you are "too qualified" as the feedback, then perhaps it was their misunderstanding on how you represented yourself on your CV. You do know how some people talk themselves up on their CV, and cannot deliver in an interview.

    Maybe they have done you a favour?

    Pax

    • kwaker on 23/05/2014 - 15:09
      +3

      I am useless in interviews but I received distinction level in education. Sometimes its more about social skills and psychology than it is about the actual tasks.

      Doesn't sound like your the right fit for a government job anyway. These jobs involve a high amount of politics and you don't seem to handle that well. Stirring the hornets nest isn't going to help you in the long term.

        • earths_pacifist on 23/05/2014 - 16:09
          +9

          I understand why you think it is corrupt and I think the process is also silly but many times internal applicants are selected because they have already been acting in the advertised role for many months if not years.

          Unlike private organisations, you cannot be automatically promoted into a position at a higher level. The position must be advertised and the staff have to apply for and then win the position.

          Logically if someone has been doing the role sucessfully for 12 months then they would normally have more experience than any other applicant.

        • buzymum20 on 23/05/2014 - 16:30
          +23

          Not having a go at you, malkakas, but I'd suggest you check your grammar and spelling on your application.
          Words like advice, confident and from have all been incorrectly spelt or misused here.
          If you've done things like this on your application then that would have put you below others.
          I know that's hard on you, but just a suggestion that you get someone to proof read over your application and make recommendations.
          Good luck in the future

        • Risser on 23/05/2014 - 18:30
          +1

          I agree Buzymum20. I recently had to short list resumes for a position in our company. With 60+ applications, I downgraded anyone with any issues on their resume. With so many applicants you start discarding resumes for small issues because the interview pool needed to be like 6 max. Things like gaps in work history, changing jobs every 3+ years, low quals, experience and bad resumes all got downgraded.

          I had to do this a number of times to finally get the number of interviewees needed.

        • Marty131 on 24/05/2014 - 01:34

          Buzymum: The OP got an interview, so obviously his resume and cover letter were ok?

        • scrimshaw on 24/05/2014 - 02:26
          +1

          I'd like to know this too. If you have someone come in for an interview, doesn't that mean the resume passed the screening stage?

        • ThadtheChad on 24/05/2014 - 11:59
          +1

          "changing jobs every 3+ years"

          Lolwut? That is a bit unfair IMHO. In quite a few "types" of industries, this is the norm rather than an aberration. A prime example of this would be consulting firms, the burn rate and stress is level is so high that it's unsustainable in the long term.

          The times where people stayed put at a job for 10-15 years is long gone. Oftentimes, a career-switch is what helps reinvigorate a person's desires to learn new stuff and upskilling. I have seen too many people who stay on for ages at an organisation and go about their jobs as a chore (typical in Unis and State govt organisations).

          Tl;dr:

          Move jobs as soon as you feel that you are stagnating, be it in terms of intellectual stimulation, challenges or paychecks. :)

        • lplau on 24/05/2014 - 14:20

          Lol maybe it is this sort of attitude that didn't get you in.
          In short, you aren't government material.

  • StewBalls on 23/05/2014 - 16:21
    +2

    I don't know about SA, but in NSW you can request a post-interview 'counselling' session in which the employer should explain to you where your application/interview fell down & why you were subsequently culled. One way or the other I would definitely ask for this, just for your own peace of mind & future reference.

    If you are not satisfied with the outcome, you can ask to have the matter referred on for review at which point the bonafides of all applicants should be examined by an independent arbitrator.

    I have seen this done successfully & unsuccessfully in several different industries over the years, but let me tell you it looks like a pretty onerous process, and would you really want to be working in an environment where you had to take them to task to get in the door…doesn't bode well for job satisfaction & security.

  • [Deactivated] on 23/05/2014 - 16:21
    +6

    If you haven't learned your lesson, read this:

    "The position of executive assistant to Australia’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva – a locally engaged position – was advertised on the Geneva mission’s website on July 4, 2012, and on www.jobup.ch and www.seek.com.au on July 5, 2012," a DFAT spokesman said.
    "The recruitment process was merit based and followed departmental procedures. During that process, a three-member selection committee interviewed five applicants from a field of 28.
    "Ms Abbott’s appointment was formally approved by the relevant delegate, Australia’s then permanent representative to the [World Trade Organisation] in Geneva on September 14, 2012.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/dfat-a…

    • skyva on 23/05/2014 - 16:28
      +6

      Always makes me laugh. It might not be that hard for a family member of a senior politician to get jobs like these.
      Imagine the questions:
      Do you have any experience dealing with foreign dignitaries: "Sure, Through Dad I met heaps. I have dealt with them for years."

      Do you have any appropriate references: "Sure, how about some UN dignitaries and heads of state I have met, here are the references they sent me".

      It is pretty hard to beat experience in the family business sometimes. Just ask Newscorp shareholders.

  • skyva on 23/05/2014 - 16:22
    +4

    1. These days it is not uncommon to be perfect for the job and not get it. Someone else was just as good. It is IT, not exactly a small field of applicants to choose from.

    2. Most HR dept's are staffed by females. Get used to it. First round they often don't even involve the people you will report to, in IT commonly male, so often it will be just HR and therefore females that recruit you. They may judge you by your looks and the way you answer rather than the actual answers. My suggestion would be to find some female friends and run through a full dress rehearsal including your clothes, hair etc exactly how you would attend the interview. I might also get them to ask you questions and judge your answers. I knew some people in HR and what they taught me was invaluable.

    3. Often the person who gets the job is the person who will get on with everyone, not the person with the best technical skills. Something to think about. After all, if you suck at your job a bit, that is your boss's problem. If you suck at people skills, HR has to sort you out and deal with all the people you deal with.

    Guess which one they would rather?

  • exc3113nce on 23/05/2014 - 17:55

    Depends on the sector - not sure about government positions, but just based on the time - 12-15 mins can be pretty standard for an interview if there are a lot of applicants. I know my mate who was applying for a legal position said they wen't through about 6 people each had about 15 minutes. He also had about 10 minutes, and go one of the available positions.

  • sarbear on 23/05/2014 - 18:34
    -1

    The other candidates were obviously more qualified.Get over it.

    • scrimshaw on 23/05/2014 - 20:39
      +5

      Or had internal connections. This is usually the case. The organisation I worked for puts ads on Seek, and short list a few people only to comply with EEO regulations but this is really just for show and the people who get the job are usually internal or are somehow already connected with the company.

  • elgrande on 23/05/2014 - 18:50
    +1

    I've had a similar experience at a government organisation, they did not talk at all about the roll, did not ask anything about me, only asked 5 official questions. At the start of the interview was told to keep the plastic cup with water as a momentum.

    Anyways, was the dodgiest interview I went to :)

    • JepunK on 24/05/2014 - 00:12
      +2

      *R.O.L.E

    • brokenxsmile on 24/05/2014 - 09:23

      Govt jobs generally don't ask about you - we don't care about your hobbies etc. They just want to know your skills and ability to do the job.

      A paper cup as a momentum? Do you mean memento? I don't think a paper cup will help propel/move you.

  • MementoMori on 23/05/2014 - 19:36
    +1

    You need to accept that you will probably never know the real reason. Just go get another job somewhere else.

  • Bargainmaniaz on 23/05/2014 - 21:21
    +4

    malkakas, you should request for Freedom of Information (FOI) right after you get the rejection email or letter. From the FOI report you should be able to see what happened. If you see something that you disagree with, you have the right to appeal the decision.

  • mparf on 23/05/2014 - 21:37
    -3

    wah wah a bunch of girls didn't like me. :(

  • smoniruzzaman on 23/05/2014 - 22:41
    +1

    Malkakas, I understand how frustrating it is to be refused but may be you wouldn't even fit in this job. When I used to get refused in a job interview, I would always console myself thinking that this job wasn't for me. I don't think you have any issues with your resume as you have been called for the interview based on this piece of paper. Someone here said he short listed candidates with any issues on their resumes. Yes low qualifications or experience can be a reason to downgrade resumes but minor grammatical errors and spellings definitely definitely should not be a reason. I have seen highly experienced people who make minor spelling or grammatical errors on a daily basis but their expertise is second to none. Unfortunately some people who are responsible for shortlisting candidates sometimes consider it a child's play and therefore downgrade resumes for small errors. They don't look at the bigger pictures either deliberately because they don't want to see anyone with more experience or ignorantly, which is an irony of course. So the bottom line is just move on. Try more jobs, don't lose your confidence and I am sure you will land in a place that perfectly suits you.

  • AntMan76 on 23/05/2014 - 23:07

    It was your job to use the 12-15 minutes available to you to demonstrate that you were the person for the position. The fact that they skipped questions shows they thought early on that you were unsuitable. And FYI most interviews aren't about your experience (they already got that from your resume and application) but about learning who YOU are and how you think, how you react or deal with certain situations, and even if you understand how a government department works.

    Trust me, even if you were considered highly suitable for the position and they did have someone internal that they knew would also be very good for the role, you would have been deemed suitable and put on an order of merit.

    A panel of all women? So what? Welcome to the public service where more and more women are getting positions of authority to balance the sexes in higher management positions (They have gone too far the other way, but that's not the discussion here).

    Your post sounds like a bit of paranoia going on.

    Face it, you weren't successful because you weren't what they were looking for. Take a look back and think what you might have been able to do better and use it next time.

    My comments are based on having been on several selection panels for an undisclosed government agency.

    EDIT: Also when you are asked if you have any questions or anything to add then use that as an opportunity to actually ask something relevant to the position. Or point out the key things about you or your experience/skills you were hoping to cover in the interview itself.

  • LakeVostok on 23/05/2014 - 23:15
    +2

    Government recruitments are by no means perfect but they tend to be fairer than private sector recruitments. While nepotism is present everywhere, Government recruitments usually incorporate components of equal opportunity, non-discrimination, absence of racism, sexism and so on. Nailing a Government job is also complicated by high competition.

    I would encourage you to apply for more jobs and keep trying. Also, it may help to not to focus on how many females are on the panel and concentrate on articulating your responses more aptly. Good luck!

  • Muimuimorris on 24/05/2014 - 07:20
    +2

    Today you are one step closer to the right job and organisation. This job was not meant to be. A better role is on the horizon. I hope you get to work with lots of women. Diversity is a good thing.

  • Wallyt99 on 24/05/2014 - 07:53

    158 Decisions went to merit review last year. 1 was overturned. Dont bother.

  • sarbear on 24/05/2014 - 09:10
    -4

    Ugh it's people like you who are ruining Australia.Things didn't go the way you planned and you didn't get the job.So you kick up a stink about it.I am sure the interviewers could see what a (profanity) you were as soon as you walked in.

  • airzone on 24/05/2014 - 09:19

    I had a similar thing once (years ago), except instead of paying for 2 hours parking, I drove for 7 hours. I knew someone in the organisation and the 2 positions advertised went to internal candidates. Why bother worrying about it.

  • chukkii on 24/05/2014 - 09:33

    I work in the ACT (aka, Public Service Territory) and this happens all the time.

    They've made up their minds about whom they want to hire but need to go through the recruitment process and interview other candidates as a formality.

    This is standard practice and I'm not sure if it's even a secret or even frowned upon in the public service.

    Not saying that I agree with the process but it is what it is.

  • johndowy on 24/05/2014 - 10:08
    +3

    Oh god, grow up. This is life. Get over it. Do you think your the only who spends a day answering questionnaires just to be let down? All of these assumptions that you are making, you have no basis. They are simply guesses. Stop complaining and move on.

    • outlander on 25/05/2014 - 00:37
      +1

      With an attitude like that how do things ever change?
      And whats to stop it getting worse

  • Gorodemon on 24/05/2014 - 13:21
    +9

    After 7 years working for private companies, I got so fed up with the working hours and conditions. I made up my mind that I want to join Vic Gov't PS. I kept checking their career board and applied like 10+ roles in my 1.5 year attempt to get a job at Gov't. I had some interviews but they all said I wasn't suitable for the role. Regardless, everytime I had a rejection, I ALWAYS ask for a feedback, whether just by email or even calling the contact person. Either way, I needed to get something out from my investments (parking,taking leave from work, resume writing, etc). I really wanted to work for Gov't and every rejection that I had, brought me closer to my dream job.

    In the end, I managed to score a job at one of state dept and I was told they picked me out of 100+ applicants and some internal applicants simply because I clicked with the interviewers. I didn't have the required knowledge (because it's so specific) but I had the general accounting knowledge and experience so it's more than enough.

    OP, I suggest you change your attitude to a more positive one. Instead of being a sour loser, just take your lesson from here and move on. Don't waste your time on challenging the decision because even if they did overturn it, you've already ruined your relationship with your future employer. Good Luck!

  • lplau on 24/05/2014 - 14:18
    +3

    Lol, interesting that people complain about not getting a job but got time to complain on Ozbargain… stop wasting your time on Ozbargain and go out and find a job!

    I am surprised you even want to get into the Public Service at this point in time with Abutt being prime minister and cutting public servants left, right and center.

    • Tal_Shiar on 25/05/2014 - 02:05

      Ironic, complaining on oBargain about complainers , complaining on ozbargain!

  • AntMan76 on 24/05/2014 - 15:02

    Why have you chosen to leave your current job?

  • Penny Wise on 24/05/2014 - 15:05

    Congratulate yourself on reaching interview stage. I’ve had to trawl through over seventy applications for an APS3 position. In my department interview rankings can remain ‘live” for six months. If the successful candidate rejects the job offer or leaves after a short time the job can be offered to the next ranked candidate. As others have said suck it up and learn from it. Ask politely for feedback and how you could do better next time. No point in kicking up a stink. Adelaide is a VERY small town….
    Incidentally you may be surprised at how often an internal candidate is rolled. It’s called taking things for granted and not making an effort.

  • sleet on 24/05/2014 - 19:02

    Sorry to butt in but advice = noun. I give you some advice.

    Advise = verb. I would advise you not to think about it.

    I feel for you and I think it's unfair. Good luck in the future!

  • ThisJustin on 24/05/2014 - 19:02
    +5

    It's not what you know, it's who you know. That's tough but it's life.

    I once had to wait close to 3 hours after the scheduled time for an interview with a company (I really wanted and needed the job at the time). When I suggested it was incredibly unprofessional for a company to be this disorganized the interviewer said "You're unemployed, you don't have anything better to do". I stood up and walked off. I also never purchase anything made by that company.

    • cwongtech on 24/05/2014 - 19:24
      +1

      When I suggested it was incredibly unprofessional for a company to be this disorganized the interviewer said "You're unemployed, you don't have anything better to do".

      That's HR for you.

  • CI on 24/05/2014 - 19:43

    Not much you can do. But you are spot on with them being dogy. It's unfair.

  • xuqi on 24/05/2014 - 20:43
    +2

    Nothing much you can do.

    I've been to one such interview in the private sector for a job offering 120K+ PA. Sat around talking about anything but the role, because HR said we had to.

    Luckily for me I was the only candidate for the position.

    As other have said, I would not kick up a stink. Adelaide is way too small. The last thing you want to be known for, is the person who caused issues.

  • Shwayne on 24/05/2014 - 20:58
    +1

    The weird thing here is that you never want to work at an organisation that allows this thing to happen because it only gets worse.

    So whilst you can and should appeal and/or report them, you still shouldn't want to work there.

  • Geewhizz on 25/05/2014 - 05:58

    Interview panel was all female

    Yeah, that DEFINITELY means it was dodgy. Do you SERIOUSLY see this as an issue? If so, I'm wondering whether this might have reflected in the way you conducted the interview.

  • mooney on 25/05/2014 - 09:55
    +5

    I've interviewed many people throughout my career and to be completely frank I can usually tell in the first 5 minutes whether the person I'm speaking to is going to be a good cultural fit for my team or not. I'll also ask a few technical questions to weed out bullshitters.

    My point is from reading your comments and original post the impact you've had on me has been overwhelmingly negative. You sound entitled, petty (started 5 whole minutes late), misogynistic (interviewed by WOMEN!), cheap (carpark) and full of ego (you cannot seem to allow yourself to think someone else might've been better than you) plus I would be surprised if your CV wasn't riddled with spelling and grammar issues.

    Tl;dr- show some self awareness, think about the impact you're having. Not everything is a conspiracy to hold you back. Maybe you just aren't the best option.

  • djones145 on 25/05/2014 - 12:24

    1.The interview started 5 minutes after the scheduled time.
    normal, I've had some 1 hour late!
    2.Interview panel was all female (I don’t know if this is normal)
    I've had this before, HR are usually all women, so they usually have one, usually they have a mix but all women normal
    3.It didn’t last more than 15 minutes (in my understanding 12-15 mins)
    4.I noticed that the interviewers had some set of questions, but they skipped through many questions.
    chances are they already had an internal candidate, but some government and private business require you to see whats out there and do external interviews before hiring (even if internal candidate is available)

  • gimme on 25/05/2014 - 12:31
    +2

    a) You may not be as good/qualified as you think.
    b) All circumstances you mentioned are quite common.
    c) As above - Earmarking is extremely common in both public/private sector. Sadly, they need to follow due process (and waste everyone's time. Pointless processes that rarely change the outcome apart from giving the appearance of a fairer. process.

  • Utopian on 25/05/2014 - 21:37

    I've got SO much varied experience I could add. But there's already so many great, detailed replies. Just one:

    My interview with Victoria Police was terrible. Not what my serving friends and family told me it would be. 90min. Started well & polite. "No rush. We're looking to get the best of you". Became a grilling. Never had one like it. The wasted time/finance/emotion invested. Had 3 years to digest it… Don't think I'll ever know 'what just happened'. I could be dirty on it all. I'd rather be humble and just accept it. I think we both lose-out. They disagree. No probs.

    • Utopian on 27/05/2014 - 02:15

      What's the neg vote mean? You've got nothing to add?
      I'm not sour. Nothing bad to say. Only offerering one experience, from 50+ different interviews (3 different countries, 40+ industries).

      Forgot to mention… They say it's policy that no feedback will be provided.

  • altomic on 25/05/2014 - 22:03

    it is just process. management are undertaking a clear and transparent employment process. to show that people score well on (a)the application and (b) the interview.

  • sydshopper on 25/05/2014 - 22:37
    +1

    What you can do (in SA)
    - You can ask for feedback on your interview.
    - You can ask HR of the department you interviewed at for a copy of the recruitment report
    - You can discuss the situation with Office of Public Employment and Review see http://www.oper.sa.gov.au/page-380
    You should be able to lodge a grievance with them

  • Kempe on 25/05/2014 - 23:13
    +3

    Talk about sour grapes because you didn't get the job!!
    Forget lodging a grievance you will lose as you cannot demonstrate you were better than the other applicants.
    Also word will spread and you wont even get interviews.
    Are you currently employed in the Public Sector because your display of sour grapes indicates you arent

  • lowndes8 on 26/05/2014 - 11:57
    -2

    Hello,

    Can i ask what organization you went to?

    Im pretty sure i know what one it is.

    PM me if you like

  • lisss on 27/05/2014 - 17:38
    +7

    The interview started 5 minutes after the scheduled time.

    I can't believe you're complaining about a 5 minute delay!

  • malkakas on 28/05/2014 - 19:07

    Thank you all for your valuable opinions.
    I did some research and found that it is very hard to challenge the interview outcome based on current circumstances. And there is no legal venue to access my interview report.
    So I decided not to follow this up anymore.
    Thank you again for your valuable thoughts.
    Malka

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join