Friday, 21 January 2011
News article speculative application
The local paper today had no interesting advertised jobs but was nice to see a news article in about a construction company winning a contract to build a large warehouse, so as was discussed at the "Back to Work Session" at the Jobcentre, I'm sending a speculative application to the company. I'm expecting another extended review with the Jobcentre at the point of 3 months since my last temp job so it will be nice to present that application as an action on the suggestion of the session.
Tuesday, 18 January 2011
The speculative letter debate
With reference to my post about the speculative application discussion in my Jobcentre Back to Work Session in December, here is a debate from MoneySavingExpert on said letters.
There's debate of the write / phone / visit issue:
Post 27 - Don't send CV's......it's no better than junk mail and gets filed accordingly. It also seems to be the 'easy answer' to job hunting. If you REALLY want a job, get your best clothes out, and come and knock on the door of people you wish to work for.
Post 28 replies - There is no right or wrong though - it is one suggestion that some will like and some won't, as is your suggestion of visiting places in person. What is proactive to someone is an irritant to another.
The author of post 27 that favours visiting adds post 31 - just do your homework on the company and pay them a visit, you have a way better chance and don't waste a fortune on stamps.
I expressed my reservations about visiting because of my own nervous body language that would likely blow my chances, post 32 says why it may not be good for the employer either - if someone came knocking at my door uninvited, interrupting what I was in the middle of and expecting me to drop everything and see them there and then at THEIR convenience, I'm afraid I'd be unlikely to view them as anything more than an irritant, regardless of whether or not they were wearing their best clothes. This poster would rather have a speculative letter because I will look through it at a time convenient to me, and with a cup of coffee to see me through. It'll probably provide quite a nice interlude in my day. If there was anything there of any interest, I'd persue it, or keep the CV on file until I needed it.
Another post from the one in favour of visiting - Sorry but getting up and going for a walk is far more pro-active than sending out a CV
countered by a very good point about premises security in post 34 - at my company you wouldn't get past security on a visit to our premises without appointment.
A lot of valid points raised in all sides showing that it is something there is no rights or wrongs about. Writing is still best for me though, and if they have an opportunity to interview then I'd at least be going with an appointment, and while I'd still have my nervousness, it wouldn't be as bad as if I turned up on spec which I just don't have the confidence to do.
There's debate of the write / phone / visit issue:
Post 27 - Don't send CV's......it's no better than junk mail and gets filed accordingly. It also seems to be the 'easy answer' to job hunting. If you REALLY want a job, get your best clothes out, and come and knock on the door of people you wish to work for.
Post 28 replies - There is no right or wrong though - it is one suggestion that some will like and some won't, as is your suggestion of visiting places in person. What is proactive to someone is an irritant to another.
The author of post 27 that favours visiting adds post 31 - just do your homework on the company and pay them a visit, you have a way better chance and don't waste a fortune on stamps.
I expressed my reservations about visiting because of my own nervous body language that would likely blow my chances, post 32 says why it may not be good for the employer either - if someone came knocking at my door uninvited, interrupting what I was in the middle of and expecting me to drop everything and see them there and then at THEIR convenience, I'm afraid I'd be unlikely to view them as anything more than an irritant, regardless of whether or not they were wearing their best clothes. This poster would rather have a speculative letter because I will look through it at a time convenient to me, and with a cup of coffee to see me through. It'll probably provide quite a nice interlude in my day. If there was anything there of any interest, I'd persue it, or keep the CV on file until I needed it.
Another post from the one in favour of visiting - Sorry but getting up and going for a walk is far more pro-active than sending out a CV
countered by a very good point about premises security in post 34 - at my company you wouldn't get past security on a visit to our premises without appointment.
A lot of valid points raised in all sides showing that it is something there is no rights or wrongs about. Writing is still best for me though, and if they have an opportunity to interview then I'd at least be going with an appointment, and while I'd still have my nervousness, it wouldn't be as bad as if I turned up on spec which I just don't have the confidence to do.
Friday, 7 January 2011
MP jailed for expenses fraud
Glad to see the first MP involved in the recent expenses fraud jailed, BBC link here. While I'm in the unfortunate position of being a jobseeker, I don't condone anyone committing jobseekers allowance fraud or claiming without actively seeking work, but these MPs have a lot to answer for when they commit fraud too!
"Mistreated at job centre - filing a complaint" forum thread
Another forum thread "Mistreated at job centre - filing a complaint" on MoneySavingExpert. The original poster had taken their standard Jobcentre handwritten diary to their appointment but was criticised that it did not appear to be enough in a condescending tone, which the poster felt the advisor thought she was one of the lazy ones or someone who is not intellegent. The posts following are a mixture of attitudes, what does stick out is that it shows the handwritten diaries alone do not carry the corroborative weight of printouts of sent e-mails and posting receipts.
Post 28 replies "Just having a couple of things on there over 2 weeks between signings doesnt sound like you are doing enough to her and she is trying to press the fact that you need to be doing more to look for work. She could have handled it differently but imagine how many people pass her desk and show nothing or very little in the way of looking for work." The same amount of writing in the diary can be open to interpretation depending on the advisor and their current mood.
Post 47 is one of the more level headed and objective ones summing up the mix of unemployed people "those determined not to work, those redundant after years of work now losing self confidence, depressed, stressed about finances..... having to work in those places.... having to suggest jobs to people they don't think will have much change of getting them whether that's because they are over or under qualified....", ending, fairly I think, with that the advisor's advice was valid but her tone was wrong.
Post 71 is a member of Jobcentre staff saying "minimum requirements are 3 active steps each week and those steps must give reasonable prospects of finding work", I think acknowledging that doesn't necessarily mean 3 applications. I'd said in my last post about the back to work session how I've seen from other forum posts, especially there on MoneySavingExpert some staff do interpret it this way, which is why it can be as well to make up the numbers in speculative applications if insufficient advertised vacancies are found in a given week.
Anyway the thread is now on its fifth page ...
Post 28 replies "Just having a couple of things on there over 2 weeks between signings doesnt sound like you are doing enough to her and she is trying to press the fact that you need to be doing more to look for work. She could have handled it differently but imagine how many people pass her desk and show nothing or very little in the way of looking for work." The same amount of writing in the diary can be open to interpretation depending on the advisor and their current mood.
Post 47 is one of the more level headed and objective ones summing up the mix of unemployed people "those determined not to work, those redundant after years of work now losing self confidence, depressed, stressed about finances..... having to work in those places.... having to suggest jobs to people they don't think will have much change of getting them whether that's because they are over or under qualified....", ending, fairly I think, with that the advisor's advice was valid but her tone was wrong.
Post 71 is a member of Jobcentre staff saying "minimum requirements are 3 active steps each week and those steps must give reasonable prospects of finding work", I think acknowledging that doesn't necessarily mean 3 applications. I'd said in my last post about the back to work session how I've seen from other forum posts, especially there on MoneySavingExpert some staff do interpret it this way, which is why it can be as well to make up the numbers in speculative applications if insufficient advertised vacancies are found in a given week.
Anyway the thread is now on its fifth page ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)