Flexible New Deal & Recruitment Ideas
What are the Independent Safeguarding Authority Guidelines that FND Providers must comply with when they are running their Centres?
Can FND Providers use other subcontractors besides those allocated for their areas if they do not meet the requirements of some of their jobseekers?
If FND Jobseekers have started part-time day courses at a college/training centre as part of their Jobcentre Plus stage 3 conditions, which was approved by their Jobcentre Plus Offices before they were referred to FND Providers, and are told by their college that they cannot transfer to a evening courses so that they can attend their FND Provider's Group sessions on that particular college day, can they continue to pursue their courses if their college days clash with their FND Providers' Group session days?
What are Psychometric tests? What is their purpose? How reliable are they? What do they cover and what is the highest score that a FND Jobseeker can achieve for each element of these tests?
Is the Jobseekers' level of education, training, skills and experience together with the results of these Psychometric tests, taken into consideration by their FND Providers, to ascertain the most suitable available vacancy they can apply for? It is a crime when the time and money invested by the government and the nation in education, training, skill development and the experience gained by people in previous occupations is wasted, if people are forced into occupations that do not match the education, training, skills and experience that they have acquired which would lead to a demoralised workforce and thus further unemployment when they leave these mismatched jobs and a brain drain when they leave the UK for greener pastures.
Why can employers not allow people who have gained good education, training and skills to apply and develop them and thus gain the practical experience they did not possess before they were offered the job. Employers in undeveloped and developing countries are happy to accept people who have acquired good education, training and skills without the necessary experience for these reasons. So therefore what is wrong with the employers in the developed countries like the UK? Why are they always asking for an experienced person? No wonder the poor school, college and university leaver is angry and disgusted with employers. Also, you can not acquire all the experience you need for your chosen occupations by undertaking voluntary work such as financial accounting experience, which you may only be able, obtain in paid jobs for organisation financial control and data protection reasons.
Does Jobcentre Plus ensure that Jobseekers whose mental/physical disability is being monitored are accompanied by their specialist at Providers' initial FND interviews?
Have employers been approached to determine what their current and future needs are in terms of the level of education, training, skills and experience they expect their current and future jobseekers to possess so that schools, colleges training centres and universities can meet them?
Why do most people always think that it is the jobseeker’s fault when he/she was unsuccessful in obtaining an interview for a job or when he/she was unsuccessful in being offered the job after the interview, when in fact he/she had done everything correctly according to the book and it was the fierce competition for the job that prevented he/she from obtaining the job as in the X Factor and Britain Got Talent Music Competition? Employers should therefore always provide reasons why an applicant was unsuccessful at the final interview to help the applicant when he/she applies for another job application if he/she was at fault. After all how can you learn from your mistakes if you are not told what they are by the employer?
Hi Patrick. I'm going to have a quick bash at these, but you've put a fairly big hodge podge in there, and I'm not an expert on the questions you're asking:
Hi Patrick
I'll try and add to Daniel's comments. You may want to make a cuppa before you start as this goes on a bit longer than I'd planned!
1) Providers requirements under safeguarding are sketchy (unless it is clear that you work with under 18s or officially vulnerable adults). Ofsted are saying that you should use the true definition of vulnerable adults but I'm not convinced - they are basically looking at anyone attending a programme as potentially vulnerable, and from a providers' point of view you should be ensuring that anyone accessing your service is safe. As such, the expectation is that anyone in a position of trust who has regular contact with "learners" would go through the ISA check. Your safeguarding strategy, policy and procedures should dictate what action you take. Risk assessment is important - how you define your customer base and what you do in different circumstances.
2) My understanding on the sub contractor issue is that if providers want to use other sub contractors that weren't part of their bid/post tender discussions they have to get JCP approval.
3) It's down to the provider to set the action plan that they think includes all of the actions required to get the individual back to work. If attendance at a group session is required and is part of the action plan (an agreed activity) then the client could be sanctioned if they fail to comply. My view on this question isn't so much about whether they can do the college course, it's whether they comply with their action plan.
4) Psychometric tests aren't a standard part of FND, it is likely to be something that a particular provider is using. Someone on FND can "score" as well as any other individual on the planet!
5) Mismatched jobs is a long term issue. Until now it's been the aim to get someone a job. Now it has to be a sustainable job, so hopefully more effort will go in to identifying an individual's skills, qualities and match this better to a long term job. If not lots of providers aren't going to get paid very much!
6) SME's can often not afford to take on employees who have no experience as they don't have the time or resources to take up the slack of someone who is in training. As much of the UK is made up of SMEs this is an issue. Experience can be gained through work placement, shadowing, volunteering etc. It's also important to really analyse your experience in order to sell it in the best way possible. Someone with limited experience who has the personality and drive to fit in could fair much better than someone with lots of experience but a bad attitude.
It is important that anyone who has no experience or is unemployed keeps developing their skills and experience to make them more attractive to an employer. Giving services for free now could pay off in the future.
7) If the client wants to have their support person with them at the interview then I don't see any FND provider who would say no. It's probably down to the individual to request it rather than it happening as a matter of course.
8) All training organisations have a responsibility to ensure they are meeting employer and labour market needs. This now has a bigger focus within the Ofsted Common Inspection Framework which is testament to the importance of this. Providers will be judged on how effective they are in this area so it will pay for everyone to take a role in identifying and meeting employer needs. Daniel is right in that at a strategic level there are many organisations already doing this.
9) There are many reasons why jobseekers fail to get an interview or job. In my view this is often down to lack of assessment (in making sure you have a realistic job goal) and lack of training provided more than the specific "fault" of the jobseeker. There is often insufficient time spent on giving jobseekers the skills they really need to be successful in their jobsearch eg mass produced spec letters, standardised CVs, lack of skills analyis, lack of marketing/sales training etc.
If you've filled in an application form you should be able to go to the employer and ask for information about why you didn't make the short list. Many larger employers will have an open and transparent system which they may be happy to share.
Jobseekers should be encouraged to follow up employers and get feedback on every interview attended (telephone, letter or email). You should definitely contact the employer where you feel your performance was really good and you matched the job spec. Many employers will be happy to give feedback but remember that some feedback may be more useful than others. Many provider staff already support jobseekers with gaining this sort of feedback so it is common place.
Okay ... I'll stop typing now ... hope some of this helps!
I recently applied online for a job with HBOS. Not long after I compltetd the application I get an email from HBOS saying I did not meet the basic entry requiremets for the position (I'd previously worked for RBS). I then emailed them asking for clarification, to which they replied other candidates more closely matched what they were looking for. I suspect the real reason my application was quickly rejected is because of the amount of time I have been unemployed. But of course, no employer is give that as a reason so we have the blanket 'other applicants more closely match what we are looking for' answer.
There are often problems with online applications as computers often do an initial check of details against pre-defined criteria. Sometimes there isn't human involvement until the next stage. If you want to be a dog with a bone go back and ask what the employer means, explaining that you want to improve your chances next time so would appreciate more guidance on what you could have done better eg skills, experience etc. It also shows you are really interested and committed so if you were on the "close, but not quite" pile it could impress them.
If you have a long period of unemployment you have to work out ways of selling yourself and filling the gap - seriously consider voluntary work or free work experience. A few weeks in a well chosen company will fill your unemployment gap and you could make yourself indispensable! Also think about what you can add in for the period of unemployment - have you done any training courses that you could include, could you sell this as a career break, have you done any voluntary work already? All of this can help plug the gaps.
Maybe an online application isn't the best format for job applications for you (without knowing more about you). Possibly a really well developed CV, well researched speculative approach, personal contacts/word of mouth etc would be more productive. It is easier to sell your skills in these approaches rather than fill in an application form.
Hope this helps.
Hello Gerry,
I believe that this is a very common experience amongst Jobseekers and that someone should seek an explanation on behalf of jobseekers. When I was not offered a finance job that I was interviewed for by the NHS, I asked my NHS Work Placement Officer to persuade the interviewees to provide me with a detailed, written explanation. My request was granted. They stated that they preferred to employ an individual who had "hands on experience" and therefore I believe employers in developed countries are only interested in people who have recent "hands on experience". I believe many employers and employment agencies target working people instead of jobseekers for this reason, and some of the Jobcentre Plus staff that I have spoken to think that it is acceptable for employees to accept these offers of employment from these poachers after working for a few years in their current job. I think a law should be passed to prevent this from occurring, otherwise what chance do genuine, unemployed jobseekers "without hands on experience" have in securing sustainable employment?
You are told by people that you should undertake voluntary work related to your future occupation to gain this "hands on experience" but as I have already stated, you will never gain certain experience unless you are in a paid job and even if you are lucky in gaining experience through voluntary work, some employers and jobseekers think voluntary work is not work and that people do voluntary work because it is an easy option and because they do not have anything of monetary value to offer an employer. These are shocking facts from my personal experience in England and therefore a campaign should be launched to promote the benefits of voluntary work to change the views of some employers and Jobseekers to enable this experience to be recognised by these employers and Jobseekers. I know that the Channel 4 TV station showed people promoting the organisation they were volunteering for in short adverts, while the Secrete Millionaire documentary was being broadcasted in the UK.
I suggest that you persuade your RBS referee to request a proper explanation for being unsuccessful and I think you might find the following links useful:
http://www.bankingforums.co.uk/about-us.php
http://www.michaelpage.co.uk/content/15758/banking-jobs-career-advice.html
Also do not depend on developed countries to find work. Undeveloped and developing countries should be considered since there is a shortage of jobseekers with good education and skills in these. Check out Guyana, South America (www.landofsixpeoples.com). I only had a City & Guilds Certificate in Information Technology and an ONC and a HNC in Business & Finance, and was able to work as an IT lecturer at a Technical Institute in this developing country without the necessary, relevant teaching qualifications and experience!! This is the only country in South America where English is the official language and £1.00 is worth approximately $500.00!!
Your comments would be appreciated and you can contact me by typing Patrick Narine Ecademy when you use the Internet Google Search Engine.
Best Regards,
Patrick Narine
Hi Patrick
While you may not agree with the way the labour market works in the UK you need to look at it from the employers' view.
Qualifications don't prove you can do a job - they prove you can study and pass an exam. While qualifications are important, employers often just want someone who can do the job already so prefer people with relevant experience, who know the business practices of their industry and can just get on with the job with little support.
Employers and agencies "target" people who are looking for a job or who have skills they can use or sell. Are you suggesting that people who already have a job should just be happy with their lot and have no ambition to improve their position? Remember that if these people get a new job they will leave a vacancy in their old company.
People who are well qualified but lack experience may need to take up a junior or trainee positions and work their way up in an organisation to reach their goal and cannot expect to go straight in to senior positions without having a proven track record.
Think like an employer, target your jobsearch to the right level and the right organisations and you will hopefully have greater success. However, with higher levels of unemployment the job market is much more competitive and employers have a greater choice of candidates. It isn't easy, but good luck in your jobsearch!
RE: Patrick,
Thanks for your post, an interesting analysis of voluntary work. You've certainly broadened my horizons by mentioning developing countries as another way for getting work, a lot more appealing than staying in the UK with too many blinkerd employers who only want to employ people who can hit the ground running - which of course excludes the long-term unemployed and those without out-of-date skills. Let's face it, they don't want to invest time and money training people, they ALL want someone else to do it.
Last year I did a free course (not funded by the taxpayer) to became a qualified (Cisco certified) IT Technician, and emailed my CV to over 15 computer shops/ repairers in Edinburgh after completing the course, not asking for a job, but for an UNPAID placement to gain more practical experience. Guess what? Got only one reply, and that was to say where I did my course had a good reputation - but no offer of a placement. I've since been working 1 day a week for a local IT charity repairing and upgrading computers. So from my own expereince I would agree with you that there should be a campaign to promote the benefits of voluntary work to employers.
Makes you wonder what the real reason for spending taxpayer's money on programs like the Flexible New Deal are really for? They're supposed to help the long-term unemploymed, but many employers regard the long-term unemployed as lepars. And of course, we all know most jobs go to the person already in work or the one who has been unemployed for the least amount if time.
I have several years admin experience and also a HND Information Studies. Thanks for the links, definitely check them out.
FND - The Truth
I work for a prime in the East Midlands and after 3.5 months of operating, feel that it right to speak about the reality of what is happening in our district.
The customers coming through are mainly in the 25+ bracket, with much smaller numbers of people arriving who are under this age - the Jobcentre are throwing the kitchen sink at this age group in an attempt to get them off the register which has had a dramatic effect on the number of outcomes we can secure as a higher proportion of the customers coming our way our much, much further from the labour market than was anticipated initially.
Senior Management have obviously been alarmed at the low numbers of people leaving into jobs (what did they really expect??) and have reacted in typical knee jerk style, bringing in drastic measures which are badly affecting morale amongst everone. Staff who become demoralised, leave (who can blame them)and are not being replaced, raising Personal Career Coach/Employment Coach caseloads to near breaking point, lessening the time they can spend with the customers, severely reducing the quality that go into putting into the action plans and will surely come back to to haunt us when ofsted arrive in the months to come.
The company has agreed to ridiculously high targets, which given the types of customers we are working with, the time we get to spend with them due to high caseloads and the state of our economy are absolutely not achievable. Unfortunately this only causes the huge amount of pressure on the already pressurised staff to increase further as the managers push the staff to put customers into jobs.
Such a shame because FND could have been so good and it is just reverting back to New Deal in the panic.
My prediction for 2010 is mass resignations and a company imploding on itself.
Watch this space.
The New Deals have been the
most successful innovation in the history of the UK labour market.
During the last 10 years, the New Deals have helped more than 1.8
million people into work.
Yeah, and 250'000 stay there!
Highpark, sounds like you've been cutting and pasting from Govt publications. New Deal has actually got very mixed reviews if you look at the research - whilst a lot of its clients went into jobs many would have got those jobs even if the new Deal hadn't have been invented. The numbers of people who got jobs because of New Deal alone and in its own right is actually quite small. That's not to say it wasn't a good thing (though I happen to think it was largely a great opportunity wasted), it's more like - as the saying goes - "don't believe the hype".
P.S. New Deal success rates at getting people into work aren't generally very much better (and are in many cases worse) than Training for Work in the early nineties, and not as good as Employment Zones or the old Ambition contracts - so not quite sure where this assertion about them being "the most successful innovation in the history of the UK labour market" comes from. Probably a Govt SPAD I should think.