Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Manx Bean

Do qualifications matter?

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Why does it make sense to exclude 80% of the population from the chance of getting some crappy IOMG job? They’re the taxpayers funding the salaries in the first place. 

Because I'd rather not spend my time applying for a job where a strong candidate is in-house and it's only been advertised externally as a tick box exercise. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, P.K. said:

Comment away. But it's not Dillis fault that she failed to meet the criteria.

It doesn't smack of hypocrisy to me because agency staff are temps utilised until an appropriate candidate is found, frequently an internal move.

The CS/PS just love their rulebooks....

Temps are placed in accordance with the qualifications they hold, my wife passed all of her secretarial exams with flying colours at college. We have had applicants apply to the firm I work for with degrees who have been unable to do some of the simplest tasks. But as you say, CS/PS love their rulebooks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone is in a temp role within the government via an agency and the role is advertised "internal" only - are they able to apply for the permanent role. 

I know in the private sector temp to perm moves have lead to the recruitment of a lot of good staff. 

Edited by Declan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Because recruitment is surprisingly expensive.

Plus someone who is already au fait with the organisation, working practices (hem hem) and so forth will be effective quicker than a newbie.

ETA plus you could hire a lemon...

So according to your comment above, somebody who is already "au fait" with the organisation and working practice etc etc. should be a better prospect than recruiting outside the government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PmJ said:

So according to your comment above, somebody who is already "au fait" with the organisation and working practice etc etc. should be a better prospect than recruiting outside the government?

Of course.

But recruiting a temp will still carry a cost burden eg pension, bennies, miles of paperwork etc etc all baggage that an internal candidate simply will not have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Temps aren't included in the pension scheme. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Declan said:

Because I'd rather not spend my time applying for a job where a strong candidate is in-house and it's only been advertised externally as a tick box exercise. 

Strong candidate? You mean some lazy twat who doesn’t even have to try anymore as anyone potentially better than them has been actively barred from applying for the job as they don’t already work for IOMG? I think all taxpayers should be able to have a shot at jobs that taxpayers money underwrite. It’s a bit like saying only IOMG workers can drive cars, or use the hospital. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, quilp said:

Temps aren't included in the pension scheme. 

Exactly right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Why does it make sense to exclude 80% of the population from the chance of getting some crappy IOMG job? They’re the taxpayers funding the salaries in the first place. 

I'd be all for this, but only when they are making one govt job redundant and not replacing it and have done an internal assessment as to who might be provisionally suitable. It is one way of reducing overall headcount.

But the rules would still have to apply that the person should be qualified/experienced enough for the new role. If not, like in the real world...off you jolly well go. The taxpayer's govt is not a charity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Albert Tatlock said:

I'd be all for this, but only when they are making one govt job redundant and not replacing it and have done an internal assessment as to who might be provisionally suitable. It is one way of reducing overall headcount.

But the rules would still have to apply that the person should be qualified/experienced enough for the new role. If not, like in the real world...off you jolly well go. The taxpayer's govt is not a charity.

Yes it is.

Successive CM's have refused to countenance getting rid of any voters CS/PS.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, P.K. said:

Of course.

But recruiting a temp will still carry a cost burden eg pension, bennies, miles of paperwork etc etc all baggage that an internal candidate simply will not have.

I think the cost burden is the staff they already employ that don't do the work they are paid to do. It's rife in government

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PmJ said:

I think the cost burden is the staff they already employ that don't do the work they are paid to do. It's rife in government

But don't forget the ones that are incapable of doing the work they are paid to do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Strong candidate? You mean some lazy twat who doesn’t even have to try anymore as anyone potentially better than them has been actively barred from applying for the job as they don’t already work for IOMG? I think all taxpayers should be able to have a shot at jobs that taxpayers money underwrite. It’s a bit like saying only IOMG workers can drive cars, or use the hospital. 

Well that's one way of looking at it. I don't share your view that all CS are malingering pisstakers. Do they automatically become that as soon as they transfer into the CS? If so there's no point opening the recruitment process out to the rest of us - because whoever gets the role is going to become one of these evil bogeymen you perpetually rage against. 

I was assuming that the CS is a bit like the large private sector organisations I've worked for. Where often there is someone who has been the deputy for Role X for a while, stood in over the interim period after the boss has left and now wants to apply for that role as the logical next step on the career progression ladder. I don't think it is fair to advertise that role to the general public, so that they waste their time engaging in a process that only can have one outcome. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Declan said:

Because I'd rather not spend my time applying for a job where a strong candidate is in-house and it's only been advertised externally as a tick box exercise. 

Hierarchy in CS, even inter-departmental, plays a significant role as to who gets what job. Cronyism is very much alive and kicking in IOMCS/public sector, always will be. If the internal candidate is that strong then their CV should stand up to scrutiny against all comers.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Declan said:

Well that's one way of looking at it. I don't share your view that all CS are malingering pisstakers. Do they automatically become that as soon as they transfer into the CS? If so there's no point opening the recruitment process out to the rest of us - because whoever gets the role is going to become one of these evil bogeymen you perpetually rage against. 

I was assuming that the CS is a bit like the large private sector organisations I've worked for. Where often there is someone who has been the deputy for Role X for a while, stood in over the interim period after the boss has left and now wants to apply for that role as the logical next step on the career progression ladder. I don't think it is fair to advertise that role to the general public, so that they waste their time engaging in a process that only can have one outcome. 

Recruiting the best is never a waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×