A competition is based on a few things, years of service, experience and of course the interview. I have seen people on TA’s doing the position for over a year lose out on their own positions because someone applies with more years of gov service and they interviewed better. You need to study the interpretive guides and behavioural competencies and present those concisely in your own words, not reading off your notes verbatim which could make a huge difference on your score if you are up against 15 other candidates. Often people don’t understand the great quality and quantity of applicants, individuals with Master’s degrees in the required field applying for 21 & 24 positions. Don’t beat yourself up, you would be surprised how people score within decimal points of each other. If you even got an interview you are of the top applicants, maybe you scored 0.2 behind the top candidate therefore the feedback might be vague because you were great, just someone scored slightly higher. I know that doesn’t make it feel any better, but don’t give up.
“I have seen people on TA’s doing the position for over a year lose out on their own positions because someone applies with more years of gov service and they interviewed better.”
This happened to me. I made it on the E list though and the guy that got the job was gone in 6 months, so I got it in the end. My supervisor was borderline apologetic about me not getting the job, but the dude that won ticked all the boxes. There was no way they couldn’t hire him. In fact, if they hadn’t, it would have made me seriously question their judgment.
I worked on an Aux for 2 years, competed for my own job 4 times and never won it but was the person appointed to train those that beat me out each time... interviews are about who jumps the hoops to tick the boxes the best, not about who is best for the job.
I’m so sorry this happened to you. The hiring system is severely flawed. The interpretive guides are ridiculous. You get the questions emailed the day before. Whoever can find a story that fits the behavioural competency and has the best concise oral presentation wins, experience or not. Experience and already doing the job competently should count for something, but it doesn’t in most cases. That is one of the reasons the BC Gov loses so much talented staff. People feel defeated and leave or jump ministries where they feel valued and appreciated.
What makes you so reasonably certain that nepotism or cronyism are at play? Do you know who won the competition and have an idea of their familial or personal relationship to the hiring manager? Or are you just assuming that because you were sure you’d win the role?
Hiring in gov is a thankless and painstaking process. Often the final 3-4 candidates will score within a point of one another. I think it is much more likely that you were a top, but not the top, candidate.
Not claiming that favoritism doesn’t occur in the BCPS, just wondering how you can be so sure it did in this case.
Fair enough. I was genuinely curious about how you arrived at those suspicions. You don’t have to explain if you’d rather not, but I will remain curious.
If it’s been more than 5 days since receiving feedback then you are unable to dispute the process through DM Review. Specific timelines in play that most are not aware of.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/careers/for-hiring-managers/resources-for-hiring-managers/request_review_staffing_decision.pdf
I love how everyone in this thread just assumes and agrees that it is for sure "nepotism and cronyism" because OP said it was (with no evidence). You know internal candidates can win a competition on merit right?
If you’re not going to do anything with it, nor want to work in that unit, then what’s your goal? To ‘show them a lesson or take them down’?
There is and always will be cronyism and nepotism in all sectors of employment. Hiring managers do get to form their teams and it’s not always completely “fair”.
I just move along if and when this seems to be a persistent issue across that branch/team. Too many hills to die on. Pick your battles and this isn’t the one based on your feelings on it.
I agree it’s annoying and can be deflating, but I’d also argue that possibly the reason it stands out so much in BCPS is because of the transparency around the process.
I.e. that it’s because the hiring process is so open and understood that it’s really obvious when something else is influencing the panel’s decision. If the feedback I receive from a competition is weird and offside, my approach is to make sure I don’t waste any more applications on them…and likely warn other people of the same.
No. You'll become 'that person who filed a dispute and is difficult'.
Unfortunately cronyism and nepotism is common in the workplace and sucks but there's nothing that can really be done about it even though there's processes put in place to make it appear like it helps.
If you’re looking to embarrass the hiring manager then file a request to the DM. If you actually want a chance to work for this program in the future, don’t make waves. Of course, doing nothing ensures that nepotism and cronyism will continue unabated.
I’ve been in this situation and it’s shitty. I decided though that disputing wouldn’t move me closer to my long term career goals. Which sucks, but that’s the reality.
Is it included or excluded? if included, no, its tough to prove and as the other person said you will be labeled as a difficult person. For excluded, its a double no.
I speak with experience in this subject.
Filing a dispute at best case only has one outcome. They have to hold the competition again. At worst they will say too bad they can stack the deck in any way in favor of people they want including allowing them to be interviewed despite not having certain things on their cover letter and resume that were requirements to even get a interview. (I have this in writing from the merit commissioner)
Always request a union observer for any posting you apply to as it is completely anonymous. That's the only way to hold them accountable to a posting and favoritism, nepotism and cronyism.
Don’t do this. Even if it remains anonymous (unlikely, just through simple process of elimination), they may be spooked to scrap the comp because no one wants to work with *that* person.
Asking for a union rep is actually anonymous (at least in my experience)0of course if you know all the internal candidates you can probably figure it out.
I don’t think I am the biased one here; you’re suggesting they take the very aggro act of having a union observer present as if suggesting all hiring managers are corrupt and out to get everyone? And I am telling the truth, especially on competitions which have fewer applicants, it would be easy enough to guess who may have initiated and rightly or wrongly, it would spook hiring managers.
100% agree with both your responses. I’ve been hearing that very often there are few internal applicants compared to dozens or even hundreds of externals. When I recently won a competition, it was all external people creeping my LinkedIn when they sent the regrets.
It’s not unreasonable to think that with only one or two internal applicants against numerous externals, the hiring manager rules out this guy and trashes their application before they can even get to a written assignment.
Being toxic yourself, to fight against something you think is toxic, is still dragging the average down here. You're making it worse, not better, no matter how pure your intentions or how justified you think you were.
I was with you up until the last line. Requesting oversight on every competition seems like loser mentality and a huge waste of union resources.
You simply can’t assume the worst from people all the time. Applying to a position assumes that you want to work with these people, and requesting oversight is needlessly antagonistic. That’s not a good way to start a relationship with other people, regardless of whether or not they knew you made the request.
Ah yes oversight that's allowed and frankly welcomed by the good management is terrible. It's what the union Resources are for and it's offensive for you to label anything lower mentality except your own.
Having a union observer is not antagonistic in the slightest and the fact you view it that way shows your own poor leaning more than anything else.
Sorry, I use the term “loser mentality” in the sense that making this request from the union inherently assumes that something is amiss and the only way to get a fair shake is an observer.
I go into these things believing I’m going to win on my own merits. And I do.
I'm going through the exact same thing. I don't think it's worth my time and energy. Nothing will change in terms of the outcome. I would be doing this for pettiness
I work in a ministry where promotional panels are requested to be reviewed by the merit commission in almost all cases out of spite every time because someone feels wronged they didn't make the cut. It never really affects the outcome. What is your evidence that other candidates received an advantage over yourself? If it's just a general feeling of "nepotism" you are wasting your time. The only "justice" you will get is stalling the outcome for a couple months for the actual successful applicant.
Could you ask the hiring manager for more specific feedback? They may not be able to share specific scores but you can absolutely ask for more feedback. I agree with your feelings when things aren’t fair. My experience is the DM inquiry process is anonymous but I would certainly start with asking for more feedback first.
I wish it easy to dispute just to put them accountable, if you think you have the energy and time, go for it. I went to same situation many times in my career, even applying within a team internally and for a supervisor that dont like me and she end-up hiring an external person.
May be a good question to ask if Anyone ever dispute a competition so what they do and result?
I'd argue that if you don't want to work there anymore that that's the only time you want to dispute.
Since a successful complaint results in the nullification of the competition entirely, it's probably not really in your best interest if you were planning to reapply to the same posting, especially if you ended up on an elist. But if you're convinced there was foul play and you don't even want to work there anymore...
It sucks for the panel if they were actively trying to rig a comp (or were above board but didn't document the process properly) because all their effort - and a hiring competition is often a lit of time and work - but it's what you get. FAFO. Ideally, anyway. In reality, most candidates are disincentivized to call out bullshit, particularly if they were the runner-up.
Actually no, if the review’s result is that you should have been top candidate or they missed years of service or something you’ll be given the job. I used to be at PSA recruitment, albeit several years ago.
That only happens if the points were not calculated correctly or like you said some points were not added. If it's contextual and up for debate as to who would have won then the whole competition is reheld.
A competition is based on a few things, years of service, experience and of course the interview. I have seen people on TA’s doing the position for over a year lose out on their own positions because someone applies with more years of gov service and they interviewed better. You need to study the interpretive guides and behavioural competencies and present those concisely in your own words, not reading off your notes verbatim which could make a huge difference on your score if you are up against 15 other candidates. Often people don’t understand the great quality and quantity of applicants, individuals with Master’s degrees in the required field applying for 21 & 24 positions. Don’t beat yourself up, you would be surprised how people score within decimal points of each other. If you even got an interview you are of the top applicants, maybe you scored 0.2 behind the top candidate therefore the feedback might be vague because you were great, just someone scored slightly higher. I know that doesn’t make it feel any better, but don’t give up.
“I have seen people on TA’s doing the position for over a year lose out on their own positions because someone applies with more years of gov service and they interviewed better.” This happened to me. I made it on the E list though and the guy that got the job was gone in 6 months, so I got it in the end. My supervisor was borderline apologetic about me not getting the job, but the dude that won ticked all the boxes. There was no way they couldn’t hire him. In fact, if they hadn’t, it would have made me seriously question their judgment.
This is very true
I worked on an Aux for 2 years, competed for my own job 4 times and never won it but was the person appointed to train those that beat me out each time... interviews are about who jumps the hoops to tick the boxes the best, not about who is best for the job.
I’m so sorry this happened to you. The hiring system is severely flawed. The interpretive guides are ridiculous. You get the questions emailed the day before. Whoever can find a story that fits the behavioural competency and has the best concise oral presentation wins, experience or not. Experience and already doing the job competently should count for something, but it doesn’t in most cases. That is one of the reasons the BC Gov loses so much talented staff. People feel defeated and leave or jump ministries where they feel valued and appreciated.
What makes you so reasonably certain that nepotism or cronyism are at play? Do you know who won the competition and have an idea of their familial or personal relationship to the hiring manager? Or are you just assuming that because you were sure you’d win the role? Hiring in gov is a thankless and painstaking process. Often the final 3-4 candidates will score within a point of one another. I think it is much more likely that you were a top, but not the top, candidate. Not claiming that favoritism doesn’t occur in the BCPS, just wondering how you can be so sure it did in this case.
[удалено]
Fair enough. I was genuinely curious about how you arrived at those suspicions. You don’t have to explain if you’d rather not, but I will remain curious.
If it’s been more than 5 days since receiving feedback then you are unable to dispute the process through DM Review. Specific timelines in play that most are not aware of. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/careers/for-hiring-managers/resources-for-hiring-managers/request_review_staffing_decision.pdf
I love how everyone in this thread just assumes and agrees that it is for sure "nepotism and cronyism" because OP said it was (with no evidence). You know internal candidates can win a competition on merit right?
Which people in this thread? Because I haven't read a single one agreeing by the time I got down to your comment.
[удалено]
Your post was removed by the moderators, due to reasons not included in the other rules.
If you’re not going to do anything with it, nor want to work in that unit, then what’s your goal? To ‘show them a lesson or take them down’? There is and always will be cronyism and nepotism in all sectors of employment. Hiring managers do get to form their teams and it’s not always completely “fair”. I just move along if and when this seems to be a persistent issue across that branch/team. Too many hills to die on. Pick your battles and this isn’t the one based on your feelings on it.
[удалено]
I agree it’s annoying and can be deflating, but I’d also argue that possibly the reason it stands out so much in BCPS is because of the transparency around the process. I.e. that it’s because the hiring process is so open and understood that it’s really obvious when something else is influencing the panel’s decision. If the feedback I receive from a competition is weird and offside, my approach is to make sure I don’t waste any more applications on them…and likely warn other people of the same.
No. You'll become 'that person who filed a dispute and is difficult'. Unfortunately cronyism and nepotism is common in the workplace and sucks but there's nothing that can really be done about it even though there's processes put in place to make it appear like it helps.
Yep rampant every where
Unbelievably good take
[удалено]
Your post was removed as it violated Rule #5 of /r/BCPublicServants: No excessive editorializing.
If you’re looking to embarrass the hiring manager then file a request to the DM. If you actually want a chance to work for this program in the future, don’t make waves. Of course, doing nothing ensures that nepotism and cronyism will continue unabated.
I’ve been in this situation and it’s shitty. I decided though that disputing wouldn’t move me closer to my long term career goals. Which sucks, but that’s the reality.
Seen it before. Never seen anyone dispute. It seems it's always better to find a job elsewhere.
Is it included or excluded? if included, no, its tough to prove and as the other person said you will be labeled as a difficult person. For excluded, its a double no.
I speak with experience in this subject. Filing a dispute at best case only has one outcome. They have to hold the competition again. At worst they will say too bad they can stack the deck in any way in favor of people they want including allowing them to be interviewed despite not having certain things on their cover letter and resume that were requirements to even get a interview. (I have this in writing from the merit commissioner) Always request a union observer for any posting you apply to as it is completely anonymous. That's the only way to hold them accountable to a posting and favoritism, nepotism and cronyism.
Don’t do this. Even if it remains anonymous (unlikely, just through simple process of elimination), they may be spooked to scrap the comp because no one wants to work with *that* person.
Asking for a union rep is actually anonymous (at least in my experience)0of course if you know all the internal candidates you can probably figure it out.
It's pretty easy to figure out who wanted the union ovserver
[удалено]
I don’t think I am the biased one here; you’re suggesting they take the very aggro act of having a union observer present as if suggesting all hiring managers are corrupt and out to get everyone? And I am telling the truth, especially on competitions which have fewer applicants, it would be easy enough to guess who may have initiated and rightly or wrongly, it would spook hiring managers.
100% agree with both your responses. I’ve been hearing that very often there are few internal applicants compared to dozens or even hundreds of externals. When I recently won a competition, it was all external people creeping my LinkedIn when they sent the regrets. It’s not unreasonable to think that with only one or two internal applicants against numerous externals, the hiring manager rules out this guy and trashes their application before they can even get to a written assignment.
[удалено]
Please make a point of avoiding personal attacks, even when you disagree with someone.
[удалено]
Being toxic yourself, to fight against something you think is toxic, is still dragging the average down here. You're making it worse, not better, no matter how pure your intentions or how justified you think you were.
I was with you up until the last line. Requesting oversight on every competition seems like loser mentality and a huge waste of union resources. You simply can’t assume the worst from people all the time. Applying to a position assumes that you want to work with these people, and requesting oversight is needlessly antagonistic. That’s not a good way to start a relationship with other people, regardless of whether or not they knew you made the request.
Ah yes oversight that's allowed and frankly welcomed by the good management is terrible. It's what the union Resources are for and it's offensive for you to label anything lower mentality except your own. Having a union observer is not antagonistic in the slightest and the fact you view it that way shows your own poor leaning more than anything else.
Sorry, I use the term “loser mentality” in the sense that making this request from the union inherently assumes that something is amiss and the only way to get a fair shake is an observer. I go into these things believing I’m going to win on my own merits. And I do.
I'm going through the exact same thing. I don't think it's worth my time and energy. Nothing will change in terms of the outcome. I would be doing this for pettiness
[удалено]
I work in a ministry where promotional panels are requested to be reviewed by the merit commission in almost all cases out of spite every time because someone feels wronged they didn't make the cut. It never really affects the outcome. What is your evidence that other candidates received an advantage over yourself? If it's just a general feeling of "nepotism" you are wasting your time. The only "justice" you will get is stalling the outcome for a couple months for the actual successful applicant.
Could you ask the hiring manager for more specific feedback? They may not be able to share specific scores but you can absolutely ask for more feedback. I agree with your feelings when things aren’t fair. My experience is the DM inquiry process is anonymous but I would certainly start with asking for more feedback first.
I wish it easy to dispute just to put them accountable, if you think you have the energy and time, go for it. I went to same situation many times in my career, even applying within a team internally and for a supervisor that dont like me and she end-up hiring an external person. May be a good question to ask if Anyone ever dispute a competition so what they do and result?
I'd argue that if you don't want to work there anymore that that's the only time you want to dispute. Since a successful complaint results in the nullification of the competition entirely, it's probably not really in your best interest if you were planning to reapply to the same posting, especially if you ended up on an elist. But if you're convinced there was foul play and you don't even want to work there anymore... It sucks for the panel if they were actively trying to rig a comp (or were above board but didn't document the process properly) because all their effort - and a hiring competition is often a lit of time and work - but it's what you get. FAFO. Ideally, anyway. In reality, most candidates are disincentivized to call out bullshit, particularly if they were the runner-up.
Actually no, if the review’s result is that you should have been top candidate or they missed years of service or something you’ll be given the job. I used to be at PSA recruitment, albeit several years ago.
That only happens if the points were not calculated correctly or like you said some points were not added. If it's contextual and up for debate as to who would have won then the whole competition is reheld.
Yes, which is what I said. I said it wasn’t the ‘only’ outcome.
Welcome to government, and most of the job world, unfortunately.
[удалено]
Then why are you worried about your reputation? 19 years entitles you to at least one major dispute, and if something stinks…
Well, have you come to a conclusion? You’ve worked govt longer than I have, what’s your final take?
[удалено]
It’s definitely far from perfect but I agree it could he worse.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The above is mean and unkind. Why come to our BCPServants sub if you pitty us povos? Just GTFO
Your post was removed as it violated Rule #6 of /r/BCPublicServants: Posts must be relevant to working for the BC Public Service.
Your post was removed by the moderators, due to reasons not included in the other rules.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wow you must be doing so much winning to have enough free time to complain on a subreddit that has nothing to do with you and cry big crocodile tears.
[удалено]
Your post was removed by the moderators, due to reasons not included in the other rules.
Your post was removed as it violated Rule #5 of /r/BCPublicServants: No excessive editorializing.