Filling Out Modern Job Application Forms

[Bloo Loo]

And hairdressers. You are quite right, thanks, I stand corrected. Still think that recruitment tools (a handy euphemism for personnel managers) are a load of spheroids. Gratifying to see from other comments they are at last discredited and going out of fashion.

I thought it was telephone sanitizers

[dipstick]

This kind of nonsense has been my gripe with the country starting a long way back. It's actually one of the reasons, in fact the main reason, I went to Uni.

I applied for a job in 1993 as a veterinary nurse - bearing in mind I left school in 1976 and worked as a kennel maid, vet nurse, dog groomer - the whole kebang. I was asked on the phone if I had A level maths. No, said I. Oh, says the vet, we can't consider you then. Hang on, says I, I've got experience coming out of my ears. The vet would have none of it.

I went to Uni.

What's more valuable, experience of doing the job for years or a qualification that may prove you might be able to do the job?

But, it does absolve people of making the decision and taking responsibility for the dopes they do employ.

I remember a few years back our company was looking for a driver. The manager and district whatever did the interviewing and gave one chap the job - he ticked all the right boxes.

Shame nobody thought to put in a box asking if he'd actually got a driver's license. No. He hadn't.

FFS!

[South Lorne]

"I always reduce my performance to a level where all my colleagues are able to feel superior regardless of colour, gender, sexual orientation etc. I am proud to say that this has given rise to the impression that I am capable of wrecking everything I touch."

p-o-p

...ahh...your main strength is commercial sabotage....

[cybernoid]

Ask them if women are over-represented in their HR department and if they think that is a good thing.

You won't last long in a place like that anyway, you'll be quitting within a year. Apply somewhere else, or better yet, offer your services as a freelance consultant and by-pass all the nonsense to get more money.

[tinker]

We seem to have gone downhill as a nation since the Personnel Dept. became Human Resources.

An excuse for busy work and ass covering, and self-justification schemes.

[Tonkers]

We seem to have gone downhill as a nation since the Personnel Dept. became Human Resources.

An excuse for busy work and ass covering, and self-justification schemes.

I just had a run in with a mad HR dept, they simply refused all reason for the issue, then made everything worse. I resigned last week!

[libspero]

With my cowboy getup I'm afraid it would be more like this for me:

I was kinda hoping you were going to post this old chestnut..

[porca misèria]

Taking a cue from some of the more serious comments offered, how about something along the lines of.......

"An answer to this section, though legitimately asked, is respectfully withheld as it is the only section that is subjective and not factual in nature. Any answer submitted would relate to the personality of the applicant only. Efficient shortlisting should prioritise on matters of core technical competence to perform the advertised position - and the desirability (or lack of) of an applicants personality and personal opinions to be determined by selectors in person at interview."

Nice response.

I might be tempted to say something too outrageous to be serious before playing your ace: "I believe all people of pigmentation should be quietly disposed of, and that women's only valid role is to satisfy my pleasures and run the house. You cannot hold that against me, because it's illegal to discriminate on grounds of political belief."

Meanwhile here's from my blog a little while back:

My recent recruitment to $bigco was, as close as possible in the real world to a perfect case of no-possible-race-discrimination. That is to say, none of the folks who made the decision ever met me in person, and I never mentioned my skin colour to them. They know they’re employing [a person with my skillset]: we discussed that at length. But they don’t know my ethnicity.

Of course they can google, they can make a guess. So can I, and my manager’s name strongly suggests that he’s from a very different racial group to my own. So neither of us can be accused of favouring our own kind (unless one of us has made a wrong guess about the other).

Now part of the documentation they expect[1] from me is a racial monitoring form, so they can “prove” they … erm … don’t discriminate. It lets me choose from:

* White

* Black-Caribbean

* Black-African

* Black-Other

* Indian

* Pakistani

* Chinese

* Bangladeshi

* Other (please specify)

Right. One category for white – the vast majority, encompassing warring catholic/protestant communities, and presumably other groups having significant tensions like jew and arab. Not to mention what the ‘merkins call “hispanic”. By contrast, no less than three different categories for black based on their history rather than their ethnicity, and three for south-asian based on country of origin. Seems to me offensive both to the white majority and to the minorities – both white and non-white.

I want the option to describe my race as “human”. But that’s not Politically Correct. Bah, Humbug.

[1] Or rather, that the Political Correctness Police expect of them.

Edited November 14, 2011 by porca misèria

[stormymonday_2011]

Nice response.

I might be tempted to say something too outrageous to be serious before playing your ace: "I believe all people of pigmentation should be quietly disposed of, and that women's only valid role is to satisfy my pleasures and run the house. You cannot hold that against me, because it's illegal to discriminate on grounds of political belief."

Meanwhile here's from my blog a little while back:

Quite a few white US citizens have Native Americans in their ancestory. Indeed the last great Comanche chieftan to resist the US army,Quanah_Parker, was half white

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanah_Parker

He even had an adopted German as his son.

I am therefore always tempted to stick Comanche in the other box and then recount this man life story to show how implicitly racist is the type of categorisation used in the UK. To me these boxes are little different from the racial stereotyping used in South Africa under apartheid or, dare I say it, Nazi Germany

Edited November 14, 2011 by stormymonday_2011

[guitarman001]

Unless I were struggling, I wouldn't even go for a job that asked this sort of thing.

Definitely either be blunt about it, e.g. this response was good:

"An answer to this section, though legitimately asked, is respectfully withheld as it is the only section that is subjective and not factual in nature. Any answer submitted would relate to the personality of the applicant only. Efficient shortlisting should prioritise on matters of core technical competence to perform the advertised position - and the desirability (or lack of) of an applicants personality and personal opinions to be determined by selectors in person at interview."

OR be very cynical and witty, knowing that you wont get it. Or just accuse them of being Nazis.

[concerned_money]

After having trawled through all that I finally come to the last section.....asking me to give examples of experience to "demonstrate an understanding of equality and diversity, and its practical application."!!!!!????

Is it me? Am I the only person who, looking at this carefully, realises that this is completely misguided diarrhoeia - and that there is no sensible way to answer the question!?

diversity = death

multikulti is cultural genocide, nothing more nothing less

equality & equal ops = inequality & unequal ops Orwell speak nothing more nothing less

this social engineering of the slave livestock makes me vomit !

[Imp]

Social Identity Theory has shown how people form groups on the most spurious of reasons, and then will discriminate in favour of their own group, and against other groups (as shown in Tajfel's minimal groups experiment). By asking me this question, I have now been forced to form a person identity which includes "white, straight, male" where as previously I did not define myself in this manner, and did not discriminate against members outgroups. With my new identity, however, created as a result of your categorizations, I am now socially and psychologically programmed to discriminate against non-whites, homosexuals and females.

[Charlie The Tramp Returns]

Filling Out Modern Job Application Forms A sign of how absurd things have become?

Try applying for a Job with Asda as a shelf stacker. After filling in a long application form acceptable only on line you then have a multiple choice test requiring 40 answers. You can`t pass questions, flag and go back, and must complete in a set time.

Easier going for a HGV licence C+E.

[200p]

These forms are what make BRITAIN, GREAT, PRODUCTIVE, and RICH!

I laugh at the Germans with their BMWs and trains. I laugh at the Japananse with their robotics.

[libspero]

These forms are what make BRITAIN, GREAT, PRODUCTIVE, and RICH!

I laugh at the Germans with their BMWs and trains. I laugh at the Japananse with their robotics.

Not all HR directors believe their own bullsh1t... though it's worrying how many really do.

Throw in a bit of SAP and other IT background and it's scary how much some of these people get paid

Edited November 14, 2011 by libspero

[kraft]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15715780

The Institute for Government said Westminster was "overwhelmingly white, male and middle-class".

[Save me from the madness!]

Seriously, whilst the advise to the OP's question is very funny, and I do agree with the stupidity of the question, if the OP wants the job then a "proper" answer needs to be entered. Giving them your opinion on why the question is invalid or putting in a joke about being a Nazi or Indian Chief, is just not going to cut it. They want an answer to the question, you want the job (or why would you be even thinking of filling the application form in), just accept that this is some stupid standard template question that the HR department have managed to get into every application form at the company and is most likely not representative of the company as a whole and more importantly the manager you'd end up working too.

Right now the HR department are inudated with loads of applications, and they are literally begging for someone to give them a reason to put them in the reject pile, and a smart alec answer to the diversity question will give them that.

Ultimately the choice is do you want the job (then answer the question normally), or do you want a one man crusade against the diversity brigade.

[anonguest]

Ultimately the choice is do you want the job (then answer the question normally), or do you want a one man crusade against the diversity brigade.

The answer is Yes AND Yes.

But I am still no closer to a suitable answer which, as you correctly state, is needed. Any suggestions? Or do you also agree that it aint quite as easy as one might think at first glance?

[dryrot]

The answer is Yes AND Yes.

But I am still no closer to a suitable answer which, as you correctly state, is needed. Any suggestions? Or do you also agree that it aint quite as easy as one might think at first glance?

You could write "I spend a lot of my spare time on 4chan /b/"?

(you read hpc at work, of course)

[Save me from the madness!]

Any suggestions? Or do you also agree that it aint quite as easy as one might think at first glance?

It's not easy, but it's not as hard as some are making out, here's my attempt (all true)

give examples of experience to "demonstrate an understanding of equality and diversity, and its practical application."!!!!!????

To date, my experience of equality at work has been based around either me being judged, or me judging others, based purely on their performance to the job description compared with everyone else on the same job dscription and having any personal information removed from that judgement (in effect annoymising the data). An example would be that a few years back, I benefited from a greater pay rise than usual due to being classified as low in the pay range compared to the average of everyone else on my job description and record of performance which helped me close the gap in salary with my peers. The only factors used were job description and annual performance ratings for the last two years (plus a minimum number of years in the job). In the UK, my personal details as a straight white male would not at first glance give rise to someone reviewing if I was being disadvantaged, but when the above annoymised method was used by HR I qualified to be given an extra rise. Everyone was included in the review, the only thing that mattered was defining your peer group based on the job description and not personal differences such as gender, race, faith etc.

Diversity is about embrassing the differences that we as individuals all have. When done correctly it can lead to very strong teams due to different points of view and strengths being used to their best potential. A simple example of a practical application of diverse teams is using people to cover work in a 24/7 way whilst still allowing the majority of employees to observe their religious holidays. For example, in a diverse team, the Hindu members could cover Christmas day on a 24/7 rota, and the Christian members could cover Diwali on the 24/7 rota, which can help increase team moral. A team with a lack of diversity (all Hindu or Christian for example) would mean that some members would definitely have to miss their religious festival which can reduce team moral.

[rw42]

Right now the HR department are inudated with loads of applications, and they are literally begging for someone to give them a reason to put them in the reject pile, and a smart alec answer to the diversity question will give them that.

Ultimately the choice is do you want the job (then answer the question normally), or do you want a one man crusade against the diversity brigade.

I disagree with this - when i review CVs i want to read something that makes it stick out. If i had 50 CVs that i could play bullsh!t bingo with, and one that said 'i think i'm good enough to tell you that this is a bloody stupid question', i'd probably get them in just to see what they say.

All through school/university, i was always told that the CV is only ever going to get you an interview. What gets you the job is being able to talk at the interview. Thats why they suggested putting stuff like hobbies on a CV - less relevant now, but when i was starting out, anything that'd make it more like a conversation and less like an interrogation had to be a good thing.

Basically, how you answer that question shows your own predjudices.

If you believe the recruiters are a load of politically correct mouth breathers, then put in some jargony crap and identify some minorities or different people that you think are really just as good as white people, once you teach them to hold their knife and fork properly, that you don't discriminate against at all, even when they talk their heathen mumbo jumbo in the office.

If you think there might be someone with a trace of soul reading the CV, be honest.

[wonderpup]

Right now the HR department are inudated with loads of applications, and they are literally begging for someone to give them a reason to put them in the reject pile, and a smart alec answer to the diversity question will give them that.

An abundance of anything leads to fetishes and abuse- look at the west's relationship with food in recent times. I walked into a supermarket not so long ago and was handed a wire basket by a young woman who had apparently become such a cheap commodity that it made sense to her employers to have her stand at the door handing out baskets to people who were perfectly capable of picking up their own baskets.

She had been reduced to a role that was little more than ceremonial, a throwaway gesture to ingratiate the public. There comes a point where these recruitment rituals shade over into the degradation of the candidate- in fact an argument could be made that anyone prepared to humiliate themselves by going through the process is by definition an unsuitable candidate.

Expect this to get worse.

[flyingsaucer]

ah, you wont work for any government agency then.

Diversity is POLICY, and it is enforced with battallions of degree educated marketing managers spouting how this diversity is of huge benefit to all, and if you dont comply, even as a supplier, you are OUT.

Utter nonsense, straight from the more paranoid sections if the Daily Mail. Suppliers are required to prove their sustainability credentials, but nothing on diversity. And why would marketing managers have anything to do with it? Diversity's the realm of HR.

[Bloo Loo]

Utter nonsense, straight from the more paranoid sections if the Daily Mail. Suppliers are required to prove their sustainability credentials, but nothing on diversity. And why would marketing managers have anything to do with it? Diversity's the realm of HR.

sorry, but I went on a cuorse with the FSB....how to tender for government contracts..DIVERSITY is REQUIRED to be fulfilled by tenderers, and Diversity for London go to great lengths on how this is of benefit to even the smallest of businesses

Heres a link for you to marvel at:

http://www.diversity...sforlondon.com/

ITS POLICY.

And heres a definition:

Diversity in a workplace setting involves:

• Valuing people’s differences both visible and non-visible. These differences will include factors such as sex, age, background, race, sexual orientation, disability, religion or belief, personality and work style
• Managing the needs and contributions of a diverse workforce
• Positive harnessing and uncovering of all talent
• A proactive positive strategy

All these points are POLICY.

the focus of the policy is on RACE and Sex......yet in one example they give, they suggest the HR person who interviews re DIVERSITY should be of the same sex/race as the person being "Managed"

Edited November 16, 2011 by Bloo Loo

[flyingsaucer]

sorry, but I went on a cuorse with the FSB....how to tender for government contracts..DIVERSITY is REQUIRED to be fulfilled by tenderers, and Diversity for London go to great lengths on how this is of benefit to even the smallest of businesses

Heres a link for you to marvel at:

http://www.diversity...sforlondon.com/

ITS POLICY.

And heres a definition:

Diversity in a workplace setting involves:

• Valuing people’s differences both visible and non-visible. These differences will include factors such as sex, age, background, race, sexual orientation, disability, religion or belief, personality and work style
• Managing the needs and contributions of a diverse workforce
• Positive harnessing and uncovering of all talent
• A proactive positive strategy

All these points are POLICY.

the focus of the policy is on RACE and Sex......yet in one example they give, they suggest the HR person who interviews re DIVERSITY should be of the same sex/race as the person being "Managed"

That's news to me and I've spent time on government procurement on both sides of the fence in recent years.

Even if it is true, it's hard to argue with those principles, is it not, unless you believe workforces should be clones of each other, and that latent talent should be stifled? Those things are in place for sound business reasons rather than some PC conspiracy.

Admittedly your last example sounds ridiculous.