Network Rail ageist?

[87031]

Applied yesterday for a CSA vacancy, got a rejection email this morning. I have 18 years experience of customer service based roles, im currently in a managerial posistion where i work as well. Would they be suspicious about someone wanting a career change and taking a pay cut at the same time.

Some people say they are ageist anyone able to throw some light of what there age policy is or are the online questions deal breakers at time of applying?

 

[Cab2Cab]

Applied yesterday for a CSA vacancy, got a rejection email this morning. I have 18 years experience of customer service based roles, im currently in a managerial posistion where i work as well. Would they be suspicious about someone wanting a career change and taking a pay cut at the same time.

Some people say they are ageist anyone able to throw some light of what there age policy is or are the online questions deal breakers at time of applying?

Hi,

I had a similar thing happened to me, i used to work on the ops/maintenance side for a TOC, and i applied for a cleaner's position near to my home and they would not take me seriously, i think they thought i was using it as a stepping stone but not necessarily so, everybody's circumstances are different, but at the end of the day you cannot make employers give you a job,

Just got to ride it out and keep trying, their loss because i am a grafter and have a interest in the railway.

Cheers

 

[87031]

Thats the problem you never get a reason, you can assume many things but still not know. Maybe the fact me working under management would cause conflict with me currently in a managers role. Dont see it as a problem myself but they might

 

[Cab2Cab]

Thats the problem you never get a reason, you can assume many things but still not know. Maybe the fact me working under management would cause conflict with me currently in a managers role. Dont see it as a problem myself but they might

I can understand why they do not supply feedback at sifting stage (too many applicants i presume), but i made it to the interview and i asked for feedback via email and nobody got back to me. It was not a anger thing because i'm not like that, i just moved on but the protocol is i think if you request feedback they have to give you reasons why you were unsuccessful.

If TDK picks up on this thread or anyone else they might be able to clarify this.

 

[LCC106]

There is no obligation to give feedback but I consider it good practice generally. That said, it could leave the company open to further probing and disagreement from the candidate. At worst, carelessly worded feedback could leave the company open to claims of discrimination.

 

[Greenback]

As long as there has been no discrimination, there should be nothing for them to worry about!

It is good practice for anyone doing the sifting not to see any information from the application regarding age, gender, sexuality and so on. If they are not aware of someone's age, then they cannot make a decision that is based on, or influenced by an applicants age.

In 87031's case, I would consider it likely that other applications fitted the job profile better. There is so much competition these days, that to be unsuccessful doesn't mean that someone is unable to do the job well, just that from an application, another applicant may simply appear to be better equipped for it.

 

[CatfordCat]

No employer ought to be applying age discrimination, but there are some employers out there (and I don't necessarily mean in the railways world) who still haven't really embraced the sex / race discrimination laws that have been around for 40 years or so...

I have no reason to suspect that NR are operating any form of age discrimination policy.

However, in general, a lot of employers are reluctant to take on people they consider 'overqualified' for jobs, on any combination of

a) maintaining a reasonable 'fit' within the existing team (although this can be dodgy if any consideration of the 'fit' includes thinking about age, race, gender, sexual orientation, disability)

b) direct relevant experience of doing the job in question

c) perception that a highly qualified candidate will only stay a short time in the job before they leave to do something requiring higher qualifications and therefore paying better - there is a cost in recruiting / training a new person and kitting them out with PPE / uniform.

All of which wouldn't be quite so bad if politicians and the press (and the job centre people) didn't criticise people for "not applying for / taking a job they think is beneath them"

And in some cases, managers are simply afraid of having someone smart working for them...

 

[AeroSpace]

So they don't want someone with "direct relevant experience of doing the job in question", and yet they don't like paying the "cost in recruiting / training a new person"??

Back on topic, just because sifters don't see candidates' ages doesn't mean they don't infer them from the application. If someone has been working since 1979 then they're hardly likely to be fresh out of school.

 

[Silv1983]

Im sensing English isn't your first language? Perhaps NR didn't cotton on to this and failed your application due to poor grammar and spelling?

 

[EM2]

As someone who has been in this position, I was 38 when I started with NR as a CSA, also with about 18 years experience in various CS fields, and I am by no means the oldest in my team.

 

[87031]

Im sensing English isn't your first language? Perhaps NR didn't cotton on to this and failed your application due to poor grammar and spelling?

English is my first language ????

 

[Greenback]

All of which wouldn't be quite so bad if politicians and the press (and the job centre people) didn't criticise people for "not applying for / taking a job they think is beneath them"

Indeed. It seems that the idea is that quantity of applications is more important than quality. I see plenty of job applications from people who don't meet the driteria at all, which really means they have completely wasted their time in completing an application.

And in some cases, managers are simply afraid of having someone smart working for them...

Well, no one wants to employ someone who will make them look stupid!

Back on topic, just because sifters don't see candidates' ages doesn't mean they don't infer them from the application. If someone has been working since 1979 then they're hardly likely to be fresh out of school.

That is, of course, very true. It is difficult, if not impossible, to have a process involving humans where they will be unable to draw any inferences from an application form.

 

[CatfordCat]

So they don't want someone with "direct relevant experience of doing the job in question", and yet they don't like paying the "cost in recruiting / training a new person"??

Oops - my post was ambiguous.

What I meant was that a highly qualified candidate might not have direct or recent experience of an 'entry level' job

For example, someone who's been a manager could probably do a cleaner's job, but an employer may prefer someone with recent experience as a cleaner.

Indeed. It seems that the idea is that quantity of applications is more important than quality. I see plenty of job applications from people who don't meet the driteria at all, which really means they have completely wasted their time in completing an application.

this is often the result of pressure from DWP staff. If you're on job seekers allowance, you have to jump through hoops to show you're "actively seeking work" and the DWP are more keen than ever to 'sanction' people (i.e. stop their benefits for anything up to 3 years) if they don't jump through all the right hoops.

 

[TDK]

It is good practice for anyone doing the sifting not to see any information from the application regarding age, gender, sexuality and so on. If they are not aware of someone's age, then they cannot make a decision that is based on, or influenced by an applicants age.

This is indeed correct as when I did sifting there were no names, addresses, age, gender or ethnic origin on any of the forms.