I care about doing a good job for the passengers and working well as a team member. I try to keep abreast of recent developments. However it seems you are more likely to progress if you are a perfunctory disinterested person who can spin a good yarn than if you actually want to do a good job all the time and not just when a manager is around.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Time to move on (Am I the only one that feels this way)
- Thread starter JamesTT
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Can't offer advice about what you should do, but if you're trying to escape this then I should point out that your observation has wider generalisability beyond the railway industry!
Jonfun
Established Member
Promotion... isn't that the thing you get when you make a right hash of your current job, or start sleeping with management?
It can feel like that outside the railway industry as well. In my case, I've had some jobs where it seemed that that my face just didn't fit, and I may not have been entirely blameless myself.
As a manager in some roles, I've also encountered members of staff who are simply too keen to do a good job, they have disregard rules and procedures in their desire to perform well and provide a good service, which only serves to undermine colleagues who do follow the rules. I'm not saying that this is in any way relevant to you, it's just something that we all need to think about whatever job or industry we are in.
As a manager in some roles, I've also encountered members of staff who are simply too keen to do a good job, they have disregard rules and procedures in their desire to perform well and provide a good service, which only serves to undermine colleagues who do follow the rules. I'm not saying that this is in any way relevant to you, it's just something that we all need to think about whatever job or industry we are in.
That quote is just so inaccurate, promotion is offered to those that management think deserve promotion and have the abilities to carry out the promoted role - this sounds like sour grapes to me!
To me that sounds like Ex-BR and early privatisation staff v more recent entrants.
There's clearly been a shift in recent years away from proper Customer Service to playing massage the performance figures and to hell with the consequences for the passenger.
Cynical but true a lot of times
It may sound like that, but my experiences in this area are outside the railway industry!
This is the problem with a discussion like this the default opinion is sour grapes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The issue there is lack of consitency one manager might praise an employee for going beyond the call of duty perhaps nominate them for an award. Another manager might berate the member of staff for going to far.
agree totally!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
it's a competition from start to finish! if someone out performs you in an interview only you still haven't obviously done enough!
So you are saying it doesnt matter how you perform at your job as long as you can perform best in the interview.
Certainly the case in my employer. All they look at is the interview. (non railway).
I've had feedback from a promotion interview that they know how strong I am in my current role, but my interview skills weren't very good.
In my last employment promotions went to the store managers friends regardless how good they were at their job.
In another previous job, I applied for a promotion and they were straight and honest I was too good front line with the customers to lose to the back office. They lost me anyway as after them telling me that, I found a new job within a week of that feedback. They offered me the promotion as soon as I handed my resignation, which naturally I declined.
Last edited:
Unfortunately I have to agree with this. I've made some terrible appointments in my time simply because the only opportunity to assess candidates is at interview. I'm not allowed to take anything else other than references into consideration. If I could appoint an internal candidate who I knew was competent and would make a positive contribution I would. Unfortunately, in my organization at least, where such opportunities arise the decision making ability is withdrawn from me due to a perceived conflict of interest and an independent chair of the appointment panel (often from a different department which has no idea about our area of work) will make the decision instead.
well that obviously depends whether you are internal or not to a certain level!......if you come from outside the industry as long as you haven't been sacked from your previous job and have a half decent reference they don't really give two hoots and it DOES come down to how you perform in the recruitment process/interview!.......to me the interview is the MOST important part. half the time even if the manager interviewing you knows how good an existing employee you already are HR only have yor reference and interview to go on and they have a BIG say.
if you are internal then obviously your performances/sickness etc have probably been monitored but just because you may be a hot shot in the job you are coming from certainly doesn't mean anyone should take a relaxed approach in an interview!.......if i was best mates with the person interviewing i'd still want to put in as good a showing as possible in an interview just in case.
99.9% of the time the interview is how the decisions are made! that's the one area where u wanna perform best!
Last edited:
Thank you it annoys me when people trot out the sour grapes line. I have seen people promoted who are lazy, rude often late or have poor sickness record. Have a bad attitude towards customers 99% of the time all because they can turn it on in the interview. The problem is this discourages those who are less confident in an interview situation from putting in the extra effort because it is not rewarded.
can totally see your point mate but there are some SERIOUS sour grapes out there! there was one in particular that whinged about the assessment stages of an intake taking place when they were on holiday and wrote letters demanding they change it to a date when they were free!
upon speaking to them about it they then played the whole i'm not particularly bothered card and then stated with overtime the promotion was only 5k more than they were already on!! people with that attitude don't deserve promotions over people who are willing to do what it takes!
I couldn't agree with you more and it's a pretty sad state of affairs. Unfortunately if you're in a medium to large ish organization then the chances are your HR department is driven by 'best practice' policies which I'm sure are very well intentioned but don't really work in practice. I as a manager am equally annoyed as I occasionally end up appointing unsuitable candidates, you're powerless to do anything about it, but you're ultimately held responsible when things go wrong!
I totally agree and that individual sounds like a spoilt brat. I suppose my issue is I started thinking I am going to work hard and put in the effort. Forge a career on the Railway and progress. It just feels that it doesnt matter about caring and putting in the effort
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Do you have a robust probation period though to enable you to get rid staff or demote those promoted beyond their capabilities
honestly mate stay positive and you'll get there!! as the guy above said sometimes management are probably as equally frustrated as you are but there are so many rules etc that they have to follow when recruiting such as distance from depot etc.......it is frustrating and i've been on the end of it myself buddy.
it took me 7 years before i managed to get to the latter stages of the recruitment for driving and when i got there i failed the interview and despite many emails they couldn't even be bothered to give me any feedback......and that job was 200 miles away from home and i'd probably spent upwards of 300 quid in travelling and hotels etc!
HOWEVER
my own toc advertised trainees weeks later and within weeks 4 months i had a driving position with my own toc on my doorstep that i VERY nearly didn't apply for through disappointment of what i'd already been through with that toc down south!
so much has to go in your favour mate a lot of hard work but also a lot of luck!.....applying to the right job,applying at the right time,having the right person interviewing you etc.........perseverance is the key mate!.......if you give up easily unfortunately they'll just think you didn't want it enough! (frustrating i know) just keep plodding on jump through the hoops,bite your tongue from time to time and you'll eventually get there mate.
My advice would be to have a think about how you 'sell' your hard work and experience in an interview. And there is a knack to it! The effort you put in does not go to waste, but only if it comes across in interview. I don't know how things work in the railway industry but in my organization the interview pannel is only allowed to take the interview and references into account, and 'safeguards' are put in place to ensure this happens.
I agree there is an inherent unfairness in the system. Trust me, it's not just candidates who get frustrated with it!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes! And I'm happy to confirm it gets put to good use. Still, you're lumped with an inappropriate appointment for 6 months!
Last edited:
where would you move onto? would you go self-employed? what role are you in at the moment?
I won't deny that there can be inconsistency between managers. Everyone has their own individual style, but when it comes to not following procedures and rules, especially in a safety critical role as so many railways jobs are, then there really should be no room for discretion.
I asked permission to help a visually impaired person on to the platform and the train when I was a new member of rail staff back in the day. I asked because I was in the booking office and such a task was normally in the realm of platform staff, but none were available.
The supervisor on duty said it was OK as the booking office was quiet, so off I went. Later in the shift there was a bit of a 'discussion' about it between supervisors, as I'd not been trained in how to lead visually impaired people across the platform and what would have happened if the passenger had come to some sort of harm, not necessarily my fault exactly, but something that training might have alerted me to be wary of.
I learnt that day that things are seldom as straightforward as they may seem. I thought I was just helping someone out, and going the extra mile, but there might well have been consequences...
Ideally, the interview, as the culmination of the recruitment process, should be designed to give a clear indication of the candidate's ability to do the job, as well as how they will fit into the existing team. There is a correlation between doing well at interview and doing well in the role, but nothing is guaranteed. However, I do believe that in a significant number of instances where the appointed candidate is not a success, that it's the fault of the way that the interview was designed.
This is a good illustration of another factor in things going wrong. In the organisations that I've worked for, managers who work in the area in question, and know what's involved, have usually had the final decision, or at least a very, very big say in it.
Having a decision maker who doesn't know the in's and out's of the role only increases the chances that the wrong person will be appointed, even if the interview has been designed well. A poor interview, which doesn't get to the bottom of finding out who the best person is, aligned with a chair who doesn't understand the role in question, is a recipe for disaster.
Lazy, rude and unreliable people shouldn't really get to the interview stage for a promotion. I do have to admit that I've seen people promoted just to get them out of a role where they were no good. To me, it's rewarding bad behaviour rather than correcting it, but it does happen, unfortunately, and the one or two cases I've known about seem to be linked to a clueless manager appointing someone via a badly designed interview or assessment process in the first place, then refusing to admit their error. Very poor practice all round.
Where I've worked, HR have only ever acted in an advisory capacity, to ensure that there's no discrimination and to administer the whole process. Managers have always made the decisions, though as I said, that doesn't always mean it's been the right manager!
I think that this is an important point. When I sat in on interviews, whether I was a decision maker or as part of HR, I was surprised how many people seemed not to care how they came across in an interview situation. There is a knack to creating a good impression, and to how you answer the questions put to you. One of the common mistakes is not listening tot he questions properly, and talking at length about something that wasn't asked. I've done this myself, and afterwards I've felt highly embarrassed when I've realised what I've done.
I haven't it's nothing to do with confidence at interview however if your attitude, appearance and determination to get the promotion are not evident you won't get the job. I have been on the railway for 16 years and have never seen someone with the attributes you have put above get promotion but seen many that haven't.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another totally untrue statement
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Reading this James it seems that you are only putting in the effort to receive a promotion and not so as it is your job too!. I have interviewed many people for promotion and taken into account their previous role, sickness record, attitude from their role and if I ever thought a candidate was only exerting in their current role solely for promotion this would not be to me a good pointer. Now if someone did their job to the best of their ability, was punctual and had a reasonable sickness record and doing this because it is what their job entails this is different.
Sounds like where you work you have decent managers who promote on merit and hard work etc is rewarded. I can assure you that it is not the same where I am. I do continue to put in the effort. Can you not empathise that it might just be a little bit demoralising though when those that have a bad attitude are promoted because they basically can tell a good story about the handful of times they have actually tried to do a good job.
it is demoralising mate but you cannot let that get to you if you want to get there!......when you have those thoughts going through your head it will not only show in your application but also your demeanour and if they can see that you'll have no chance!
the whole process is about selling yourself in the best way possible at all times whether you are a company man or whether your attitude stinks!.......this may mean you have to jump through the hoops and smile through gritted teeth at the system and your competition but if it gets you there it's gotta be worth it!.........i suppose it all comes down to what people deem as fair! is the only fair way to give people the jobs who have the best attitudes and work performance etc or is the only fair way to treat everyone the same no matter who they are!?
the whole process is about selling yourself in the best way possible at all times whether you are a company man or whether your attitude stinks!.......this may mean you have to jump through the hoops and smile through gritted teeth at the system and your competition but if it gets you there it's gotta be worth it!.........i suppose it all comes down to what people deem as fair! is the only fair way to give people the jobs who have the best attitudes and work performance etc or is the only fair way to treat everyone the same no matter who they are!?
That's correct. When I got passed over for a job that I thought I was more suitable for than the appointed person, that's exactly what I did. And it worked, although it took a little time. The promoted person couldn't hack it and returned tot heir former grade, with me replacing them.
There you go!......proof that A- the system isn't perfect but also proof that B- if you stick at it you do get there!
i think the key here is not to turn into one of the whiners who think that you are owed a promotion but be one of the guys that takes it on the chin, listens to the feedback,learns from it and comes back a stronger candidate next time!
we had loads of people at our place moaning about who was chosen for our intake as they all thought they were better suited but we all took great pleasure in passing out with flying colours and giving the whiners the big V
No matter where you work there are always whiners in all aspects of the job, you get the "I've been here in this grade for 20 years and an upstart gets the role I wanted" well, if someone cannot get up the ladder in 20 years then to be fair they are not suitable and need to accept that. There are many things that people do and people say to managers that will in the future ensure they are never put forward for promotion.
This isn't directed at you James but I have seen people blatantly go off sick because they cannot get annual leave, constantly run the company down, do things that will cost the company money just because they can etc. then moan that they were not selected for promotion. Red the big "V" needs to be given a bit later than the pass out, get a couple of years under your belt incident free and then that "V" will be a lot bigger and more secure than it is just after pass out
- Status